Document: 389 U.S. 35 88 S.Ct. 189 19 L.Ed.2d Johnny Daniel BEECHERv.ALABAMA. No. 92, Misc. Decided Oct. 23, 1967. Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III and Michael Meltsner, for petitioner. MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen. of Alabama, Leslie Hall, Asst. Gen., respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 On the morning June 15, 1964, petitioner, a Negro convict in state prison, escaped from road gang Camp Scottsboro, Alabama. 16, woman's lifeless body was found not more than mile prison camp. The next day, petitioner captured Tennessee; he then returned to Jackson County, where indicted, tried, convicted on charge first degree murder. jury fixed his punishment at death. After Supreme Court Alabama affirmed conviction, filed this petition certiorari, contending that coerced confession used as evidence trial, violation Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment.1 2 uncontradicted facts record are these. Tennessee police officers saw fled into an open field fired bullet right leg. He fell, local Chief Police pressed loaded gun face while another officer pointed rifle against side head. asked him whether had raped killed white woman. When said not, called liar said, 'If you don't tell truth I am going kill you.' other petitioner's ear, immediately confessed.2 Later same day received injection ease pain signed something described 'extradition papers' after told 'it would be best * sign papers before people came there killed' him. taken by ambulance Kilby Prison Montgomery, By 22, leg, which later amputated, become so swollen wound painful required morphine every four hours. Less hour one these injections, two investigators visited hospital. medical assistant 'cooperate' and, presence, inform if did 'tell them what they wanted know.' left alone with State's investigators. In course 90-minute 'conversation,' prepared detailed statements similar given five days earlier gunpoint Tennessee. Still 'kind slumber' last injection, feverish, intense pain, written confessions thus 3 These were admitted over objection.3 Although is some dispute precisely occurred room hospital,4 we need resolve evidentiary conflict, even accept accurate version transpired there, set forth above lead inescapable conclusion involuntary. See Davis v. State ofNorth Carolina, 384 737, 741—742, 86 1761, 1764—1765, 16 895. 4 already wounded police, ordered speak guilt or killed. From time until directed 'what know,' 'no break stream events'. Clewis Texas, 386 707, 710, 87 1338, 1340, 18 423. For still under influence drugs, complete mercy hospital authorities. Compare Reck Pate, 367 433, 81 1541, 6 948. 5 says case differ respects those previous cases have held But constitutional inquiry issue voluntariness 'requires mere color-matching cases,' 442, 1547, A realistic appraisal circumstances compels product gross coercion. Under Amendment, no conviction tainted obtained can stand. motion leave proceed forma pauperis certiorari granted judgment reversed. 7 Reversed. 8 Mr. Justice BLACK concurs reversing but does exclusively ground Self-Incrimination Fifth Amendment Constitution United States, made applicable States Amendment. Malloy Hogan, 378 1, 84 1489, 12 653 (1964). 9 BRENNAN, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE DOUGLAS join. 10 concur reversal. This our decision 653. test admissibility stated Malloy, plainly compel Court's inadmissible because We 7, 1493: 11 '* criminal prosecution tested standard applied federal prosecutions since 1897, when, Bram 168 532, 183, 42 L.Ed. 568, '(i)n trials, courts wherever question arises incompetent voluntary, controlled portion commanding person 'shall compelled any witness himself." Id., 542, 187. test, conduct obtaining shocking, 'free voluntary: is, (it) must extracted sort threats violence, nor direct implied promises, however slight, exertion improper influence. *' 542—543, 186 187; see also Hardy 224, 229, 22 889, 891, 46 1137; Ziang Sung Wan 266 14, 45 3, 69 131; Smith 348 147, 150, 75 194, 196, 99 192.' makes claims. light disposition case, do reach them. introduced its existence vitally relevant statements. Bayer, 331 540—541, 67 1394, 1398—1399, 91 1654. Because part bearing hearing new suggests '(h)is complaint improperly now comes too late.' That suggestion clearly untenable. objected when introduced; having overruled objection, trial court rejected claim could reviewed motion; procedural bar reaching merits deciding it record. There doubt here raised 'in (an) appropriate manner,' Brown Mississippi, 297 278, 286—287, 56 461, 465—466, 80 682. event, deemed it, treat below resting upon adequate independent conclude might properly relied such avoid question. Indiana ex rel. Anderson Brand, 303 95, 98, 58 443, 445, 82 685. claimed during their talk him, obligation anything One attorney, negative reply. refer warnings, although conversation took place date Escobedo Illinois, 478, 1758, 977, accepted investigators' accounts contrary testimony 'not all persuasive.'

Category: 0