Johnson v. State

OPINION

BRYNER, Chief Judge.

Charles A. Johnson appeals from a conviction of grand larceny, 1 claiming that the superior court erred in denying his pretrial motion to suppress a confession which he made to the police. Johnson's principal argument is that his confession was involuntary because it was induced by police promises of leniency and that, therefore, constitutional due process was violated 2 by use of the confession as evidence against him. Johnson thus urges that we reverse his conviction. 3 In opposition, the State argues that we must affirm the conviction because evidence presented…