HECTOR (A SLAVE) V. STATE, 2 Mo. 166 (1829) CASE BRIEF

HECTOR (A SLAVE) V. STATE

2 Mo. 166 (1829)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Hector (D) sought review of the judgment of the trial court, which convicted him of burglary. This was a dispute over the admissibility of a coerced confession.

FACTS: A burglary was discovered and Hector (D), a slave was caught and whipped. D was whipped through the night and was told that if he confessed and returned the money, he would be released. McKinney was awakened at day break by the whipping and inquired about the problems. McKinney investigated and asked D if he took the money. D confessed and agreed to show the money so long as those flogging him would not come with them. D took them to a house but did not show the money. He was beaten again and then left. D's counsel then moved the court to exclude McKinney's testimony from the jury, on the ground that the confession of Hector was not freely and voluntarily made, but extorted by pain. The court overruled the motion. The prisoner's counsel also prayed the court to exclude from the consideration of the jury, all the confessions which were extorted from him, which the court refused. It instructed the jury that they should exclude from their consideration any confession made by D under the influence of torture or pain, or hope or fear, but that the confessions of D, which, in their opinion, was given freely and voluntarily, should be taken as good evidence against the prisoner, which instruction was objected to. D was found guilty and appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner