Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

  Download original PDF

Firetamag v Trust Territory [1963] TTLawRp 18; 2 TTR 413 (25 March 1963)

TRIAL DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT

YAP DISTRICT

Criminal Case No. 87

FIRETAMAG

Appellant

v

TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS

Appellee

March 25, 1963.

Defendant was convicted in Yap District Court of malicious mischief in violation of T.T.C., Sec. 398. On appeal, the Trial Division of the High Court, Chief Justice E. P. Furber, held that defendant's acknowledgment that he had committed crime, made outside of court in presence of prosecutor and defense counsel, dip not alone constitute sufficient evidence on which to base conviction when defendant pleaded not guilty at trial.

Reversed and remanded.

1. Constitutional Law-Due Process

No person in Trust Territory may be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

2. Constitutional Law-Self-Incrimination

No person in Trust Territory may be compelled in any criminal case to be witness against himself. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

3. Constitutional Law-Public Trial and Confrontation of Witnesses

In all criminal prosecutions in Trust Territory, accused has right to public trial, and to be confronted with witnesses against him. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

4. Criminal Law-Rights of Accused-Confrontation

Accused in criminal proceedings in Trust Territory may only be convicted after trial before impartial court, on basis of information presented as provided by law before court and in presence of interested members of public, subject to certain exceptions involving minors and scandalous matter. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

5. Criminal Law-Evidence

All facts necessary to show guilt in particular criminal case should be shown either by legal evidence or by stipulations or admissions which judge is authorized to accept in place of evidence.

6. Evidence-Stipulations and Admissions

Any stipulation or admission, in order to be accepted in place of evidence, must be made or presented publicly in open court just as evidence is.

7. Criminal Law-Rights of Accused-Confrontation of Witnesses

Purpose of public trial is to protect rights of person accused of crime so that public may see he is fairly dealt with, and to keep judge aware of his responsibility, importance of his work, and fact public has right to know about it. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

8. Criminal Law-Rights of Accused-Confrontation of Witnesses,

Purpose of public trial in criminal case is defeated if court is allowed to consider as evidence information passed to it privately or indirectly and not in regular course of judicial proceedings. (T.T.C., Sec. 4)

9. Confessions-Generally

If accused in criminal case acknowledges outside of court that he committed crime charged, or admits all things which government would have to show to prove him guilty are true, this constitutes a confession.

10. Confessions-Corroborating Evidence

Voluntary confession made outside of court may be shown in evidence against accused at trial, provided there is other substantial evidence showing crime charged has actually been committed.

11. Confessions-Admissibility-Trial Procedure

If accused in criminal case objects to admission of confession on ground it was not voluntary or was improperly obtained, court should give both sides opportunity to present evidence on how confession was obtained before evidence of confession is admitted.

12. Confessions-Admissibility

Court should refuse to admit confession in criminal case unless satisfied it was voluntarily made.

13. Criminal Law-Generally

In Trust Territory, courts are expected to promote substantial justice in criminal proceedings and to take equal care to see that those who are guilty beyond reasonable doubt are punished and that those who are not guilty beyond reasonable doubt are not punished.

14. Criminal Law-Burden of Proof-Reasonable Doubt

Trust Territory courts are expected to give accused in criminal proceedings benefit of any reasonable doubt there may be as to his guilt.

15. Confessions-Corroborating Evidence

No one should be convicted in criminal case on basis of confession alone.

16. Confessions-Corroborating Evidence

In order to convict accused in criminal case in Trust Territory, there must be enough other evidence besides confession so that court is satisfied by confession and other evidence that accused has committed crime charged beyond reasonable doubt.

17. Criminal Law-Prosecutor's Error or Omission

Decisions of other courts which hold that accused in criminal case is entitled to acquittal at close of prosecution's case where it has failed to prove essential element of crime, and that if this is not granted he should be acquitted on appeal, have no application in Trust Territory. (T.T.C., Sec. 200)

18. Criminal Law-Prosecutor's Error or Omission

In criminal proceedings in Trust Territory, where essential point of prosecution's case is omitted through inadvertance or misunderstanding, and it is probable there is sufficient evidence available on it, appellate court will remand case with such directions for new trial as may be just, instead of merely reversing judgment. (T.T.C., Sec. 200)

19. Civil Procedure-Arguments by Counsel

In Trust Territory, argument addressed to judge hearing case as to fact in that case should come after evidence has been taken and should be based on evidence and on stipulations and admissions which have been properly accepted in place of evidence.

20. Civil Procedure-Arguments by Counsel

No new facts should be brought up in argument to judge trying case that have not been covered by evidence and stipulations and admissions properly accepted in place of evidence.

21. Malicious Mischief-Malice

Where express reference to "malice" has been eliminated from statute covering malicious mischief, previous remarks of court regarding meaning of statute as it stood before amendment, and similar remarks· of text writers and other courts, are not directly applicable to amended section so far as malice is concerned. (T.T.C., Sec. 398)