(DOWNLOAD) "State v. Robuck" by Supreme Court of Montana ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State v. Robuck
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 31, 1952
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 55 KB
Description
1. Witnesses ? Cross-examination ? Defendant not unduly restricted. Where defendants counsel was not allowed to cross-examine her alleged accomplice concerning his testimony on direct examination which had been stricken from record, but was allowed to cross-examine the accomplice fully concerning circumstances related in in the stricken testimony, defendant was not unduly restricted in such cross-examination. 2. Criminal Law ? Test whether confession is voluntary. The test applied in determining whether a confession is voluntary - Page 303 and hence admissible is "was the inducement which was held out to the accused such as that there is any fair risk of a false confession?" 3. Criminal Law ? No inducement here. Where the defendants accomplice was told that it would probably help defendant if he made a written confession, and defendant, who had been told by officers that she had right to counsel and that anything she said would be used against her and that she had a right not to make any statement, was thereafter told by the accomplice that she should confess because it would probably help her, the defendant was offered no inducement which might result in a false confession, and confession she made was, therefore, voluntary. 4. Criminal Law ? Confession ? effect of absence of counsel. The fact that confession of a crime was procured in the absence of counsel does not affect the admissibility of the confession if it was otherwise voluntarily given. 5. Criminal Law ? Advice as right to counsel ? Effect on admissibility of confession. Whether the defendant was advised of her right to counsel and whether she was advised that she need not make a statement, were questions for the court in passing on the admissibility of the conher to another town for questioning made false statements to her regarding her family, would not render a confession later obtained inadmissible. 7. Criminal Law ? Confession held admissible. Evidence sustained the finding by the court in ruling confession admissible, that the defendant knew what statement contained and that she was not so affected mentally by sleeping pills as not to fully understand what she was doing when she signed the state-fession. 6. Criminal Law ? Effect of false statements made by officers. Fact, if true, that officer who arrested defendant and brought ment.
 "State v. Robuck" by Supreme Court of Montana ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}