Document: 332 U.S. 742 68 S.Ct. 300 92 L.Ed. 330 LEEv.STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No. 91. Argued Nov. 21, 1947. Decided Jan. 19, 1948. Mandate Conformed to April 12, See 34 So.2d 736. Mr. Forrest B. Jackson, of Miss., for petitioner. Richard Olney Arrington, respondent. Justice MURPHY delivered the opinion Court. 1 This case involves a question procedure under due process clause Fourteenth Amendment United States Constitution. Does defendant in state criminal proceeding lose right contend that confession was coerced because his testimony fact never made? 2 Petitioner, 17-year-old Negro, indicted by grand jury Mississippi on charge assault with intent ravish female previous chaste character. During course trial, offered two city detectives as an alleged oral obtained them from Objection made this had been secured result duress, threats and violence inflicted upon petitioner unidentified police officers several hours prior confession. The retired preliminary hearing held before trial judge voluntariness After various witnesses appeared, including himself, concluded voluntary relation thereto admissible. proved be crucial element leading jury's conviction His sentence fixed at 18 years prison. 3 Th Supreme Court affirmed appeal, rejecting petitioner's contention introduction contravened rights Amendment. It stated conduct have struck threatened was, if true, indefensible warranted condemnation. But it felt 'the issue well credibility such qualification, we are not willing disturb conclusion.' 29 211, 212. constitutional treated quite differently court filing suggestion error. found he making entirely undisputed record. also steadfastly testified, both merits jury, did admit committed crime. then stated: 'If accused denied having any all, would feel constrained reverse herein becaue threat him during forenoon plain clothes men is wholly undisputed, jailer asked about threat, testified only anyone presence after arrest But, think one crime cannot heard say make same time inducement fear.' 30 74, 75. error accordingly overruled. 4 incomplete record us precludes our determination whether deny confessed crime.1 assuming so testify, agree below thereby estopped asserting law. important introduced, admitted used evidence guilt. Not may influential inducing verdict, but formed essential part evidentiary basis now review. denial went original actually confession, no longer open. That most disputed one; resolved matter against and, like below, accept determination. sole concern validity based use 5 invalidates grounded whole or which product other than reasoned choice.2 A resulting however, less void some point confessed, voluntarily involuntarily. Testimony nature can hardly regalize conflicts accepted principles process. And since system permits b sanctioned conformity those principles, inconsistent should preclude raising appropriate manner. White v. State Texas, 310 530, 531, 532, 60 1032, 1033, 84 1342. Indeed, foreclosure complain 'of wrong fundamental mere pretense rendered void,' Brown Mississippi, 297 278, 286, 56 461, 465, 80 682, itself 6 judgment must reversed. Since upheld solely thought entitled raise issue, remand definitively express its views issue. 7 Reversed. transcript us. At us, regard confession: 'I don't know what all I said, didn't it.' He details Such testimony, might construed nothing more layman's inexact way stating answers amount absence complete record, matter. 682; Chambers Florida, 309 227, 472, 716; Canty Alabama, 629, 612, 988; 631, 706, 989; Id., 1342; Lomax 313 544, 61 956, 85 1511; Vernon 547, 1092, 1513; Lisenba People California, 314 219, 62 280, 86 166; Ward 316 1139, 1663; Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 64 921, 88 1192; 327 274, 66 90 667; Lyons Oklahoma, 596, 1208, 1481; Malinski New York, 324 401, 65 781, 89 1029; Haley Ohio, 302. See, general, Boskey Pickering, 'Federal Restrictions Criminal Procedure,' 13 U. Chi. L. Rev. 266, 282—295.

Category: 0