Document: 357 U.S. 426 78 S.Ct. 1354 2 L.Ed.2d 1443 Milda Hopkins ASHDOWN, Petitioner,v.STATE OF UTAH. No. 158. Argued April 1, 1958. Decided June 30, Mr. J. Vernon Erickson, Richfield, Utah, for petitioner. Walter L. Budge, Salt Lake City, respondent. Justice BURTON delivered the opinion of Court. 1 A jury in a Utah court found petitioner, Mrs. Ashdown, guilty first-degree murder her husband and recommended life sentence. The question before us is whether petitioner's oral confession was obtained such manner as to make its use evidence violation due process law required by Fourteenth Amendment Constitution United States. This issue thoroughly considered trial which made findings relation it. Supreme Court reviewed record detail upheld admission confession. 5 2d 59, 296 P.2d 726. We granted certiorari. 353 981, 77 1286, 1141. Our independent review brings same conclusion. On July 5, 1955, Ray husband, died suddenly his home Cedar Utah. Petitioner had summoned doctor who arrived shortly Ashdown's death. testified that deceased gave appearance having been poisoned he told just taken some bitter-tasting lemon juice about half hour earlier. being called, sheriff thorough search Ashdown but no trace any poison. An autopsy performed, contents deceased's stomach sent state chemist's office analysis. report, received on 9, stated contained strychnine. 3 9 day funeral. Promptly after receipt went cemetery, arriving interment. Through brother-in-law, asked petitioner come County City Building. At 4 p.m. she sister at sheriff's office. talk with privately consented. They across hall an empty courtroom where sheriff, deputy district attorney, all people known talked next five one-half hours. results report. Within first hour, attorney advised did not have answer questions entitled consult attorney. She request time. said think could add anything help investigation, mentioned despondent several occasions. officers let freely family matters without interruption conversation consumed time spent interview. attempted direct attention discovering husband's death might accident. To impress importance distinction between manslaughter, read statutes relating those crimes. In addition, experience Army Europe. He accused killing men but, cooperating investigating officials, cleared blame deaths. events 5. admitted giving cup put salt denied mistakenly used poison instead salt. drank offered him. replied not, thrown out remainder cup, unwashed, top Frigidaire. their house, washed, standing drainboard. When it, that, gone second neighbor's house call (who returned), washed placed it explain why walked past moment last extremity, wash cup. times wanted confess something done, they repeatedly not. 6 Petitioner, one point, strychnine juice. After brief interrogation how done believe himself. then confessed or six grains planned take herself later decided give husband. emotionally upset, crying sobbing. came four hours questioning began. hesitated say suggested should respond this request. merely them everything except from, well tell 'and get over with.' 7 Meanwhile, father uncle see denied, pending completion waited and, request, trips home. From position outside courtroom, heard confessed, relatives. refused, saying ashamed face them, persisted eventually 8 10th, prepared written statement what took cell. sign wished, changes. examined carefully, numerous changes, signed trial, held extended hearing absence admissibility confessions. stand during preliminary only said. challenge other statements ruled including statement, be excluded. Thus, introduced jury. 10 emphasizes once avoided criminal charge officers. argues implied promise immunity leniency exercised return agree under circumstances, improper. It long connection accidental explanation Moreover, done. 11 study whole convinces interview temperate courteous. proceeded cautiously acted consideration feelings For example, explained reason seek until 'We thought we would calm wouldn't excited know doing. didn't want feel like taking advantage her.' Petitioner's emotional distress may attributed remorse, rather than coercive conduct There nothing indicates chose immediately funeral order capitalize feelings. Rather, appears opportunity established caused poisoning. whom petitioners knew. questioned relays repeat story while interrogators searched inconsistency flaw. allowed chose. sum, find ample support finding intend effect overbearing will. 12 Accordingly, judgment affirmed. 13 Affirmed. 14 BLACK dissents. 15 DOUGLAS, concurs, dissenting. 16 appeared arrested. said, 'I don't has got right father's presence attorney.' remark look me fair, square deal, railroad girl into counsel friends description.' 17 were admission. calmed assurance lawyer side aid police true. 18 kin friend jail furnished inside examination demand enough. Certainly calmer accused. speak unless clear, case, waived elected instead. reasons my dissent Crooker v. California, 441, 1287. I reverse conviction.

Category: 0