GRAHAM v. STATE, Fla., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Bart A. Riley and A.C. Dressler, for appellant. J. Tom Watson, Attorney General, Woodrow Melvin, Assistant Attorney General, Robert R. Taylor, County Solicitor, and Glenn C. Mincer, Assistant County Solicitor, for appellee.

Judges

Harold L. Tom Sebring

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The defendant, Mary A. Graham (appellant), was charged in the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County with making an assault upon Elsie Watts with intent to procure a miscarriage by inserting a surgical instrument by way of the vagina into her womb, an offense denounced by Section 797.01, Florida Statutes, 1941. The appellant waived a jury trial. At the conclusion of the bench trial the court found the defendant guilty. The appellant appealed the judgment of conviction to the Supreme Court of Florida, Division B (opinion dated November 26, 1943).

The record contains testimony by the prosecuting witness, Elsie Watts, that she was then pregnant and visited appellant to arrange for an abortion; appellant agreed for a financial reward. A few days later Watts returned, paid part of the agreed price, disrobed, got upon an operating table, and remained for approximately three hours while appellant worked with surgical instruments attempting to produce the abortion. Other State witnesses corroborated essential details of Watts' account. Voluntary confessions made to investigating officers were also received in evidence at trial.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the appellant was found guilty based solely upon a confession without sufficient independent proof of the corpus delicti to permit admission of that confession.
Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

The appellant contended she was convicted based upon a confession and that there was not sufficient independent proof of the corpus delicti to authorize reception of that confession in evidence.

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the appellee's legal arguments beyond the State's presentation of evidence and corroboration discussed in the court's analysis.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Nickels v. State, 90 Fla. 659, 106 So. 479.	The corpus delicti need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt before confessions of the accused may be received; if there is prima facie evidence tending to show the crime has been committed, a freely and voluntarily made confession may be admitted.	The court applied this principle to conclude there was sufficient preliminary proof of the corpus delicti in the record to authorize admission of the appellant's voluntary confessions.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court first addressed the appellant's contention regarding admission of her confession absent sufficient proof of the corpus delicti. It found that the record contained sufficient preliminary proof to permit admission of the confession. The court relied on the prosecuting witness's testimony—detailing the agreement for an abortion, the subsequent visit during which part payment was made, the patient's disrobing, her remaining on the operating table for approximately three hours, and the appellant's use of surgical instruments—and on corroborating testimony from other State witnesses. Because that evidence, viewed as prima facie proof that the crime occurred, preceded the offering of the confession, the confession was admissible provided it was freely and voluntarily made.

The court noted the legal principle (citing Nickels v. State) that the corpus delicti need not be established beyond a reasonable doubt before admission of a confession; the trial court must decide in the first instance whether prima facie evidence of the corpus delicti exists. The court observed a conflict between appellant's testimony and State witnesses' testimony but concluded the testimony overall supported the State's case. The trial judge resolved credibility and factual conflicts and found the appellant guilty. The Supreme Court concluded there was ample evidence to sustain that finding beyond a reasonable doubt and that no reversible error appeared in the proceedings.

Holding and Implications

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Direct effect: The trial court's judgment convicting the appellant was affirmed, and the conviction stands.

Broader implications: The opinion applies the established rule regarding admission of confessions where prima facie evidence of the corpus delicti exists (as articulated in Nickels v. State). The opinion does not announce or discuss any new legal rule beyond applying that precedent to the facts of this case.

Show full summary ...

MARY A. GRAHAM v. STATE OF FLORIDA

SEBRING, J.:

The appellant was charged with making an assault upon one Elsie Watts, with intent to procure a miscarriage of the said Elsie Watts, by inserting a surgical instrument by way of the vagina into her womb. The offense charged is denounced as a crime, by Section 797.01 Florida Statutes, 1941. The appellant waived trial by jury. At the conclusion of the trial, the court found the defendant guilty of the offense charged. This appeal is from the judgment of conviction.

The appellant contends that she was found guilty upon a confession, without sufficient proof, otherwise, of the corpus delicti. We cannot agree with this contention. We find sufficient preliminary proof of the corpus delicti, in the record, to authorize the receipt in evidence of the confession. According to the testimony of the prosecuting witness, she, being then pregnant, visited the appellant to arrange for the production of an abortion. Appellant agreed to perform the operation, for a financial reward agreed upon between the parties. A few days later, at a time arranged by the parties, Elsie Watts returned for the operation. After paying over a part of the agreed price, the patient disrobed and got upon the operating table. She remained there for a period of three hours, while appellant worked with surgical instruments upon the person of the patient, attempting to produce the abortion.

Nothing will be gained by a detailed narrative of what transpired. In our opinion, the testimony of the prosecuting witness was sufficient in itself to prove the charge, at least prima facie. Other State witnesses were produced whose testimony corroborated the story of the prosecuting witness in essential details. Voluntary confessions made to investigating officers were received in evidence. There was no error in their admission.

The corpus delicti need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, before confessions of the accused may be received. Although requisite to a conviction, that degree of proof is not a prerequisite to the admission of a confession. If, when the confession is offered there is already before the jury evidence tending to show that the crime to which the confession relates has been committed, the confession should be admitted, provided it is freely and voluntarily made and otherwise admissible; the court deciding in the first instance whether the evidence of the corpus delicti is prima facie sufficient to authorize the admission of the confession in evidence. Nickels v. State, 90 Fla. 659, 106 So. 479.

The testimony of appellant did not agree with the testi-mony given by State witnesses, although, in our opinion, it strengthened it in some of the essential details.

A conflict of evidence was presented for consideration by the trial judge. From the evidence, he determined that the appellant was guilty of the crime charged. There was ample evidence to sustain this finding, beyond a reasonable doubt.

All objections made by appellant to the entry of judgment have been duly considered We find no reversible error in the proceedings.

The judgment, therefore, is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

BUFORD, C. J., and BROWN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

GRAHAM v. STATE