People v. Hoy Yen
People v. Hoy Yen
Opinion of the Court
The statement of the prisoner that he would point out the place where the money was buried, in connection with the fact that he did, in pursuance of this promise, afterward point out the place, and the fact proved by other witnesses, that the stolen money was found buried at the place indicated, was admissible in evidence, although the promise to point out the place was not voluntarily made. (1 Greenl. Ev. 281.) The statement, “ I buried it in the ground there,” was inadmissible, it being a part of an involuntary admission. But the Court struck it out on motion of defendant’s counsel, and afterward, by a very full and pointed instruction drawn by defendant’s counsel, and given at his request, fully guarded the jury against considering, 'or giving any
Mr. Justice Rhodes expressed no opinion.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- THE PEOPLE v. HOY YEN
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Statement of Prisoner, as Evidence against Him, when not Voluntarily Made.—Where a prisoner, accused of robbery of certain money, promised to point out the place where the money was buried, and afterward pointed out a place at which, it was proved by other witnesses, the stolen money was found : held, that such statement, when taken in connection with said fact and proof, was admissible in evidence against him, although not voluntarily made. Idem.—But when, in such case, in connection with such promise, the prisoner further stated, “ I buried the money there held, that this was inadmissible as evidence against him. Striking Out Evidence. — Where, on a criminal trial, improper evidence had been admitted against the defendant, under his objections and exception, and afterwards, on motion of his counsel, the Court struck it out, and gave to the jury a pointed instruction, prepared by and given at the request of said counsel, guarding them against giving the excluded evidence any consideration or weight: held, that the error was cured.