64 S.E. 424 (S.C. 1909), State v. Turner
| Citation | 64 S.E. 424, 82 S.C. 278 |
| Opinion Judge | WOODS, J. |
| Party Name | STATE v. TURNER. |
| Attorney | Nelson & Nelson and Graham & Sturkie, for appellant. G. B. Timmerman and W. W. Hawes, for the State. |
| Case Date | April 09, 1909 |
| Court | Supreme Court of South Carolina |
Page 424
Appeal from General Sessions Circuit Court of Lexington County.
B. G. Turner was convicted of seduction, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded for new trial.
The defendant, B. G. Turner, was convicted of seduction by the court of general sessions for Lexington county. The appeal to this court involves two inquiries: First. Was there any corroboration of the testimony of the prosecutrix to warrant the submission of the case to the jury? Second. On the charge of seduction is the previous chastity of the prosecutrix a material ingredient of the crime to be established by the state?
The statute under which the defendant was indicted was as follows: "That any male person above the age of sixteen years, who shall, by any means of deception and promise of marriage, seduce any unmarried woman in
Page 425
this state, shall, upon conviction, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be fined or imprisoned at the discretion of the court; but no conviction shall be had under [82 S.C. 280] this section on the uncorroborated testimony of the woman upon whom the seduction is charged; and no conviction shall be had if on trial it is proved that such woman was at the time of the alleged offense lewd and unchaste." Act Feb. 22, 1905, 24 St. at Large, p. 937. Save for the testimony of the prosecutrix, there was no evidence whatever of "any means of deception and promise of marriage" on the part of the defendant. In order to establish the crime of seduction, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, with evidence corroborative of the testimony of the prosecutrix, that she was induced to have unlawful sexual intercourse with the accused by means of his deception and promise of marriage. Kenyon v. People, 26 N.Y. 203, 84 Am. Dec. 181; State v. McCaskey, 104 Mo. 644, 16 S.W. 511; Harvey v. Territory, 11 Okl. 156, 65 P. 837; McCullar v. State, 36 Tex. Cr. R. 213, 36 S.W. 585, 61 Am. St. Rep. 847; Mills v. Commonwealth, 93 Va. 815, 22 S.E. 863; Ferguson v. State, 71 Miss. 805, 15 So. 66, 42 Am. St. Rep. 492; Cooper v. State, 90 Ala. 641, 8 So. 821; Russell v. State, 77 Neb. 519, 110 N.W. 380; Wilhite v. State, 84 Ark. 67, 104 S.W. 531; State v. Raynor, 145 N.C. 472, 59 S.E. 344; State v. Brown, 65 N. J. Law, 687, 51 A. 1109, and others. There being no corroborative evidence on this material issue, the defendant was entitled to a direction of a verdict of acquittal.
The next exception, taken to the charge of the circuit judge, involves the proposition whether the chastity of the woman is presumed in the first instance, or whether it must be proved by the state as one of the ingredients of the crime. The portion of the charge excepted to is as follows: "That the defendant is bound to prove by the preponderance of the evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
218 S.W. 767 (Tex.Crim.App. 1920), 5451, Slaughter v. State
...15 Ann. Cas. 222; Kenyon v. People, 26 N.Y. 203, 84 Am. Dec. 177; State v. Smith, 84 Iowa, 522, 51 N.W. 24; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. In Mills v. Commonwealth, 93 Va. 815, 22 S.E. 863, the holding was that an instruction to the jury to the effect that the c......
-
143 S.E. 674 (S.C. 1928), 12464, State v. Heavener
...presumption of chastity" nullified each other, suffice it to say that, ever since the decision in State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88, the chastity of the prosecutrix has been presumed in prosecutions for seduction, and, in conformity with the statute, where the ......
-
275 S.W. 833 (Tex.Crim.App. 1925), 8642, Dunlap v. State
...State, 5 Iowa, 389, 68 Am. Dec. 708; State v. Hemm, 82 Iowa, 609, 48 N.W. 971; Wilson v. State, 73 Ala. 527; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. Under State v. Kelly, reported in 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 476, will be found an exhaustive note covering many pages, dealing w......
-
127 S.E. 574 (S.C. 1925), 11725, State v. Stanley
...v. Evans, 18 S.C. 138; State v. Jeter, 47 S.C. 5, 24 S.E. 889; State v. Jeffcoat, 54 S.C. 198, 32 S.E. 298; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 282, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. The basis for the charge of libel in the Henderson Case, supra, gives a most graphic account of the first meeting of the &q......
-
218 S.W. 767 (Tex.Crim.App. 1920), 5451, Slaughter v. State
...15 Ann. Cas. 222; Kenyon v. People, 26 N.Y. 203, 84 Am. Dec. 177; State v. Smith, 84 Iowa, 522, 51 N.W. 24; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. In Mills v. Commonwealth, 93 Va. 815, 22 S.E. 863, the holding was that an instruction to the jury to the effect that the c......
-
143 S.E. 674 (S.C. 1928), 12464, State v. Heavener
...presumption of chastity" nullified each other, suffice it to say that, ever since the decision in State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88, the chastity of the prosecutrix has been presumed in prosecutions for seduction, and, in conformity with the statute, where the ......
-
275 S.W. 833 (Tex.Crim.App. 1925), 8642, Dunlap v. State
...State, 5 Iowa, 389, 68 Am. Dec. 708; State v. Hemm, 82 Iowa, 609, 48 N.W. 971; Wilson v. State, 73 Ala. 527; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 278, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. Under State v. Kelly, reported in 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 476, will be found an exhaustive note covering many pages, dealing w......
-
127 S.E. 574 (S.C. 1925), 11725, State v. Stanley
...v. Evans, 18 S.C. 138; State v. Jeter, 47 S.C. 5, 24 S.E. 889; State v. Jeffcoat, 54 S.C. 198, 32 S.E. 298; State v. Turner, 82 S.C. 282, 64 S.E. 424, 17 Ann. Cas. 88. The basis for the charge of libel in the Henderson Case, supra, gives a most graphic account of the first meeting of the &q......