Opinion ID: 1412869
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: bobby white ferrell's appeal

Text: Ferrell assigns as error the admission in evidence against him, over his objection and exception, of the extra-judicial confession of defendant Leak incriminating him, as above set forth. When the statement was made, detective Hight testified Ferrell promptly denied it. All this amounts to is an accusation by Leak, which Ferrell promptly denied. Under such circumstances the principle of admission by silence does not come into play. It is true detective Hight then testified Ferrell never denied participating in them [the robberies]. This later statement of Hight is obscure, but it seems by Hight's use of the word them he was referring to other robberies McNeil and the other codefendants of Ferrell had stated to him that all of the defendants in this case were implicated in. We are fortified in our opinion by the statement in the affidavit of Standish S. Howe, above set forth, which states in part: We wanted to stop these trials if we could, because the defendants had something like 15 different bills of indictment against them. We think Leak's extrajudicial confession incriminating Ferrell under the circumstances here was not competent in evidence against Ferrell, and its admission was error, State v. Herring, 200 N.C. 308, 156 S.E. 538; State v. Bryant, 235 N.C. 420, 70 S.E.2d 186, which entitles him to a new trial. The result reached is this: In McNeil's case, no error; in James Eugene Waller's case, no error; in Ferrell's case, new trial.