Court Opinion

ID: 9643674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:37:10.426054+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:56.329637
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
MORRISON, Judge.
In our original opinion we stated but did not discuss the fact that the appellant made no request that the question of the voluntary nature of the confession be submitted to the jury. Some confessions are inadmissible as a matter of law. This is not such a case.. If the accused felt that the confession, to the *65introduction of which he had offered no objection, had been secured from him by means of some inducement, it then became his duty to indicate to the trial court his desire that the jury pass upon this question. That is one of the functions of the jury, and the appellant should have availed himself of their services in this regard.
We will certainly not say as a matter of law that the mere inference that an officer may have lead the accused to believe that if he confessed no case would be filed against the common law wife of his alleged confederate rendered the confession inadmissible.
Remaining convinced that we properly disposed of this cause originally, appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.