State v. JohnsonState v. Johnson
Defendant was convicted of armed robbery, a violation of R.S. 14-64, and appeals, raising four assignments of error.
In Assignment No. 1, defendant contends the trial court erred in admitting a typewritten confession because it was not read to him before he signed it. It is' his position that bеcause it was not read back to him there is inadequate assurance that the typеwritten version correctly relates the substance of his oral confession.
Investigating оfficers testified that defendant gave them a statement during which Detective Clinton Beaugh 'tоok notes. These notes were then typed by the secretary, and the typed confession was presented to defendant for his signature. Though defendant signed the confession, officers could not be sure he read it. Detective Beaugh testified he read the confession to defendant, but he could not recall with certainty whether he read the typеd confession or the notes from which the typed confession was made. Officer Gautreáux testified that Detective Beaugh read defendant the typewritten confession. Each person present during the time defendant gave his oral confession testified that the typed confession substantially reflected the oral statement given by defendant.
To be admissible, a confession need not be a verbatim record of defendant’s oral versiоn. State v. Comery,
The trial court heard testimony that defendant gave an oral statement during which Beaugh tоok notes and that the typewritten confession, confected from those notes, substаntially reflected this oral statement. Gautreaux testified it was read to defendant. Beaugh could not be certain. Defendant was given ample opportunity to read it and оbject to any part he considered inaccurate. Finally, defendant who makes no allegation that he is illiterate, or that coercion was used to obtain his signature, signed it.
We find no merit in this assignment.
In his second assignment, defendant contends that because he did not sign the waiver of rights form his сonfession is inadmissible.
Lack of a signed, written waiver of rights form is not determinative of the issue оf voluntariness of a confession. State v. Singleton,
Each of the three persons present during defendant’s confession testified he was informed of his constitutional rights as required by Miranda. Detective Beaugh testified that when he asked defendant whether he understood these rights defendant rеsponded “yes.” Officer Gautreaux testified that he could not recall defendant’s response but he was certain defendant voiced no misunderstanding. Mr. Otis Lomenick, Jr., legal adviser for the St. Landry Parish
No evidence introduced at thе motion to suppress even tended to show that defendant was coerced into giving his confession. Hence, from a review of the record before us, we conclude that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress the confession. In spite of the lаck of a written waiver of rights, the State met its affirmative burden of establishing the- free and voluntаry nature of defendant’s confession imposed by R.S. 15:45.
At oral argument before this court, defеndant contended that police did not hon- or his initial request not to speak to them. Rather, he contends, they persisted in questioning him until the confession was obtained.
The recоrd reveals no such persistence. Detective Beaugh testified that defendant did not wаnt to speak to them “the first time,” and he was not compelled to; but that “the second timе” he did want to speak to them. It was during this “second time” that the confession was given. During the motion to suppress, defendant introduced no evidence to substantiate this claim.
This assignment has no merit.
Defendаnt neither briefs nor argues his third assignment of error to this court; hence it is waived. State v. Reed,
In his fourth and fifth assignments, defendant alleges that a pistol and stocking introduced at trial were inadmissible becаuse they were by-products of the allegedly inadmissible confession. Because the confession was admissible, these contentions have no merit.
The conviction and sentence are affirmed.
Notes
. “Before what purposеs to be a confession can be introduced in evidence, it must be affirmatively shown that it wаs free and voluntary, and not made under the influence of fear, duress, intimidation, menaces, threats, inducements or promises.”