State v. Warren
This text of 68 S.E.2d 779 (State v. Warren) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
An extrajudicial confession of guilt by an accused is admissible against him when, and only when, it is in fact voluntarily made. S. v. Rogers, 233 N.C. 390, 64 S.E. 2d 572. When the circumstances surrounding the confession in issue are appraised at their true probative value, they engender an abiding conviction that the confession was wrung from the defendant by coercion on the part of the officer, and particularly by his threat to deprive her of her personal liberty until she acknowledged her guilt. This being so, the confession was involuntary, and should have been excluded. S. v. Brown, 233 N.C. 202, 63 S.E. 2d 99; S. v. Stevenson, 212 N.C. 648, 194 S.E. 81; S. v. Crowson, 98 N.C. 595, 4 S.E. 143; S. v. Parish, 78 N.C. 492; S. v. Dildy, 72 N.C. 325; S. v. Whitfield, 70 N.C. 356; S. v. George, 50 N.C. 233.
*119 Ministers of tbe law ought not to permit zeal for its enforcement to cause them to transgress its precepts. They should remember that where law ends, tyranny begins.
The admission of the involuntary confession constitutes prejudicial error, and necessitates a
New trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
68 S.E.2d 779, 235 N.C. 117, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-warren-nc-1952.