Biddle v. Commonwealth case brief

Biddle v. Commonwealth case brief summary
141 S.E.2d 710 (1965)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Defendant appealed the order from the Corporation Court of the City of Norfolk (Virginia), which convicted her of first-degree murder in the death of her three-month old daughter from malnutrition and dehydration. The trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress her statement in which defendant asserted that the detective failed to warn her that she had the right to remain silent.

CASE FACTS
The detective testified that defendant gave her statement freely and voluntarily. Defendant testified that while she was not threatened or abused, she was afraid, and that the detective promised that she could go home if she gave a statement.

DISCUSSION

• On appeal, the court considered the effect of the recent Escobedo decision and held that the failure to warn defendant of her right to remain silent did not render the statement inadmissible, but was only another circumstance for the trial judge to consider. 
• The court found that the credibility of the witnesses was an issue for the trial judge and that the evidence supported the finding of voluntariness. 
• The court looked to the common law to define murder, which Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-21 (1960, 1964 C. Supp.) did not define. 
• The court noted that murder was a homicide committed with malice aforethought, either express or implied. 
• The court held that the willful or malicious omission of the mother's duty to feed her child would have been murder, but that a negligent omission or indifference could only be manslaughter. 
• The court held that the Commonwealth's evidence, as a matter of law, did not prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

CONCLUSION
The court reversed defendant's conviction of first-degree murder in the death of her child by malnutrition and dehydration. The court remanded the case for a new trial.

Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law