Opinion ID: 1533871
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 16

Heading: The Commonwealth Referred to Appellant's Statement to Police as a Confession

Text: At trial, the Commonwealth presented a chart that showed a chronology of the events of the case. The chart contained one entry that listed the date of Appellant's confession to police. Appellant objected at trial on the ground that the statement to police should not be labeled a confession because Appellant asserts that it was involuntary. He further posits that calling the statement a confession impinges on the role of the jury. Appellant's argument that his statement should not be referred to as a confession is absurd. Webster defines confession as a statement of guilt or obligation in a matter pertaining to oneself. WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY 475 (16th ed.1971). Appellant told police that he had sexually assaulted Barbara Jean and killed her with a pull down bar. N.T. 10/3/96 at 62-65. It would be hard to conceive of a statement that more clearly fits the definition of confession. As Judge Stout stated when she overruled the objection of Appellant: Well, he says he never intended to do anything bad to this little girl. Then he described in detail what he did, hitting her in the head and everything else. So, if that is not a confession, I don't know what is. N.T. 10/3/96 at 6-7. Deciding whether to admit the chart into evidence was a decision trusted to the sound discretion of the trial court. We will not overturn its decision absent an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Wharton, 530 Pa. 127, 607 A.2d 710 (1992). There was no abuse of discretion with regard to this issue.