Riley v. State, 209 Ala. 505, 96 So. 599; Rogers v. State, 37 Ala. App. 8, 65 So.2d 525; Id., 259 Ala. 124, 65 So.2d 531; Collins v. State, 234 Ala. 197, 174 So. 296; Wyatt v. State, 35 Ala. App. 147, 46 So.2d 837; Id., 254 Ala. 74, 46 So.2d 847; Littlefield v. State, 36 Ala. App. 507, 63 So.2d 565; Id., 258 Ala. 532, 63 So.2d 573; Harris v. City of Birmingham, 36 Ala. App. 119, 54 So.2d 900; Id., 256 Ala. 429, 54 So.2d 904; Avery v. State, 237 Ala. 616, 188 So. 391; Id., 308 U.S. 444, 84 L.Ed. 377, 60 S.Ct. 321. A proper predicate is established when it is shown that a confession was made in the absence of an inducement of fear or hope. Brown v. State, 243 Ala. 529, 10 So.2d 855; Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358; Howard v. State, 19 Ala. App. 373, 97 So. 377. Error cannot be predicated on trial court's overruling of objection to question when the question was never answered.
They are presumed to have been coerced by undue influence. McCullars v. State, 208 Ala. 182, 94 So. 55; Fitzhugh v. State, 35 Ala. App. 18, 43 So.2d 831; 339 U.S. 986, 70 S.Ct. 1007, 94 L.Ed. 1388; Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358; 6 Alabama Dig., Criminal Law, 531(1). That the defendant was insane as a result of a disease of the brain at the time of the commission of the criminal act, and that such insanity was the producing cause of act, is a good defense.
We recognize that extra judicial statements are prima facie involuntary and the duty rests on the trial judge to determine at the outset that the confession was, in fact, voluntary. Such a confession or inculpatory admission can only be used after proof of a voluntariness predicate. In Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358, the court stated when facts and circumstances attending the confession clearly show that it was made without fear or hope of reward, then the necessity of laying a formal predicate is not required. In Greer v. State, supra, this court followed the earlier case of Sullins v. State, 53 Ala. 474, in which our Supreme Court held:
When the attendant facts and circumstances surrounding the utterance of an inculpatory statement by an accused established that the statement was not made under the influence of either hope or fear, the necessity for laying a formal predicate for its admission into evidence is obviated. Logan v. State, 251 Ala. 441, 37 So.2d 753; Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358. The determination of the voluntariness of an inculpatory statement rests within the discretion of the trial court, and its decision to allow such a confession into evidence will not be disturbed unless abuse of discretion clearly appears. Dennison v. State, 259 Ala. 424, 66 So.2d 552; Blackburn v. State, 38 Ala. App. 143, 88 So.2d 199.
Those cases where all the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of the statement clearly prove it was voluntarily done. See Hines v. State, 50 Ala. App. 161, 277 So.2d 905 (1973); McAdory v. State, 62 Ala. 154; Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358. In the case at bar the officer who obtained the statements from the appellant had a short time previously, in an effort to execute a search warrant, broken down the door of appellant's home and placed appellant under arrest, searched his person and his apartment, carried him to jail, and there held him in custody and interrogated him in a room with no one else present.
" In Greer v. State, 36 Ala. App. 522, 60 So.2d 358, the authorities are collected and the Court stated: "A confession of incriminating assertion is presumed to be involuntary and inadmissible in evidence.