Court Opinion

ID: 9757679
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 22:53:27.819584+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:42.270497
License: Public Domain

Harrington, Chancellor
(dissenting) :
*586The arrest of Rickards, the plaintiff in error, was illegal and the testimony of the officer who was the main witness in the court below related to his observations after the arrest with respect to the actions and statements of Rickards and the smell of liquor on his breath. There was some corroborating testimony by another officer and by a civilian relating to substantially,the same facts observed after the arrest, though the civilian had no sense of smell and could not detect the odor of liquor on Rick-ards. The relevancy of all of this testimony to support the charge in the indictment is not questioned by the majority of the court. They are of the opinion, however, that it was improperly admitted because it related to things observed while Rickards was being held illegally under arrest and conclude that the judgment of the Court of General Sessions should, therefore, be reversed. I am unable to agree with that conclusion.
The majority opinion concedes that at common law pertinent evidence was admissible, though improperly and even illegally procured. Commonwealth v. Dana, 2 Metc. (Mass.) 329; Commonwealth v. Tibbetts, 157 Mass. 519, 32 N. E. 910; People v. Defore, 242 N. Y. 13, 150 N. E. 585; 8 Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Ed., §§ 2183, 2184. Most of the state courts follow that rule (Wigmore on Evidence, § 2183) and the Delaware Court of General Sessions has repeatedly applied it. See State v. Episcopo, 7 W. W. Harr. (37 Del.) 439, 184 A. 872; State v. Chuchola, 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 133, 120 A. 212.
Article 1, Section 7 of the Delaware Constitution of 1897 pro-Article 1, Section 7 of the Delaware Constitution of 1897 provides that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused * * * shall not be compelled to give evidence against himself,” but I do not think it governs this case.
When pertinent evidence, tending to prove guilt, is before the court, it should not be excluded on the theory ■ that individual *587rights under the constitutional guarantees are superior to the rights of the people of the State to protection from violations of the law. See State v. Reynolds, 101 Conn. 224, 125 A. 636; People v. De-Fore, supra. If an overzealous officer exceeds his authority he can be sued or prosecuted and punished like any other person. See Wigmore on Evidence, §§ 2183, 2184.
Moreover, Rickards in the legal sense was not compelled to incriminate himself while he was held under arrest. See People v. DeFore, supra; People v. Adams, 176 N. Y. 351, 68 N. E. 636, 63 L. R. A. 406, affirmed 192 U. S. 585, 24 S. Ct. 372, 48 L. Ed. 575; People v. Dennis, 132 Misc. 410, 230 N. Y. S. 510. The testimony of the witnesses in the court below merely related to their observations of Rickards and of his acts during that time. See People v. Dennis, supra.
In People v. DeFore, supra, the court commenting on a provision in the New York Constitution, similar to Article 1, Section 7 of our Constitution, said: “This immunity, like the statutory one against unreasonable search and seizure, was considered in the Adams Case (People v. Adams, 176 N. Y. 351, 68 N. E. 636, 63 L. R. A. 406, supra). We. limited it to cases where incriminatory disclosure had been extorted by the constraint of legal process directed against a witness.” [242 N. Y. 13, 150 N. E. 589.]
This rule is no longer followed by the Supreme Court of the United States. Pertinent evidence, though improperly procured by a person not an officer or agent of the State, is always admissible. Burdeau v. McDowell, 256 U. S. 465, 41 S. Ct. 574, 65 L. Ed. 1048. But the majority of the court seem to regard an overzealous officer as a greater danger to the community than an unpunished violator of the law. I am unable to agree with that reasoning and think the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.
Carey, J., concurs in this dissent.
Richards, C. J., did not participate in this case.