State v. Miller

Citations

• 68 Wash. 239
• 122 P. 1066
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 1275

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law — Evidence—Confessions—Admissibility—Duress. A confession is inadmissible as one obtained by duress, where it appears that the prosecuting attorney threatened the accused with a series of prosecutions which would culminate in cumulative sentences, unless he confessed, he was subjected to solitary confinement in a dark cell, and testified that he was subjected to severe personal violence, and was denied communication with an attorney or any person; especially in view of Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2611, making it a misdemeanor for an officer to refuse to permit such communications, or to subject a person to personal violence or threats for the purpose of inducing confessions.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Evidence—Confessions— Duress — Second Confessions — Presumptions. Error in the admission of confessions of a prisoner induced by threats, imprisonment in a dark cell, and personal violence, is not cured by evidence of another like confession, procured four days later, after removal from the dark cell, where there was no evidence that the influence of the duress and threats was removed at the time of the second confession; and the presumption of continuing influence must be overcome by clear, strong, and satisfactory evidence.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Evidence—Induced by Threats and Duress — Accomplices. The evidence of an accomplice in burglary will not be held inadmissible as induced by threats or promises, where the witness testified that it was not, and the evidence was given six months after the alleged threats and coercion of the witness by confinement in a dark cell; the strict rules governing confession of the prisoner on trial not applying.</p>