Lisenba v. California

Facts

James (D) conceived of a plan of marrying and insuring his wife's life by policies providing double indemnity and then killing her in a manner to appear as an accident and then to collect his double down money. D targeted Busch, and a month later, he married her in a ceremony that was not legal as D was still married to his wife. The marriage with his wife was annulled, and a lawful ceremony was performed. The insurance was placed on Busch when they were affianced. Then D enlisted Hope (D1) to do away with her and collect and divide the insurance money. D told D1 to get rattlesnakes, but they were not lethal enough, and D1 eventually purchased others and delivered them to D. D then blindfolded his wife, tied her to a table, had D1 bring the snakes into the room and caused them to bite her on the foot. The bite did not have the desired effect and D told D1 that he would drown his wife. D1 helped D carry the body to the backyard pond and placed it face down with head and shoulders in the water. Two friends were brought back to the house, and they found the murdered wife in the position indicated. The autopsy showed the lungs were almost filled with water; the great toe showed a puncture and the left leg was swollen and almost black. Nothing came of the investigation into the death. The insurance company refused to pay but D sued them, but that ignited a fresh investigation. D was then arrested for the crime of incest and made statements respecting his wife's death. D claimed that after he was booked for the incest charge, he was beaten, and questioned without let up for a number of days. During the next few days, he made no incriminating statement but was told by his attorney that he should not talk to anyone without him being present. Hope was arrested on May 1 and D was taken away for more questioning. During this round, he was denied the presence of counsel. Eventually, after an all-day session, an officer and D were left alone, and D claims that he was threatened. After which in the presence of other interrogators, D confessed. D blamed D1 for the murder and claimed that it was D1's idea. During trial, the circumstantial evidence was mounting as it was proven how D1 participated and the snakes that were sold to D1 were found and identified. D's statements were offered into evidence. Objection was made in that they were not voluntary. The trial court ruled them as admissible. The State also offered evidence with respect to the death of a former wife of D in 1932. Her death with that of another man in a bathtub and the collection of double indemnity and that marriage and death a few months later made things look really bad for D. The trial judge ruled the confession voluntary but issued a jury instruction that stated if the confession were not voluntary, they were to be disregarded. D was convicted and appealed. 

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.