Barr v. People of State
| Decision Date | 30 March 1885 |
| Citation | 113 Ill. 471 |
| Parties | DANIEL W. BARRv.THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Mason county; the Hon. GEORGE W. HERDMAN, Judge, presiding.
Mr. H. W. MASTERS, for the plaintiff in error. Mr. GEORGE HUNT, Attorney General, and Mr. T. N. MEHAN, State's Attorney, for the People.Mr. JUSTICE SCOTT delivered the opinion of the Court:
Plaintiff in error was indicted at the August term, 1883, of the Mason county circuit court, for an unlawful assault upon Hester A. Rohlfing, with intent to commit a rape upon her person. There seem to have been two trials of the case in the circuit court. On the first trial the jury failed to agree upon a verdict, and were discharged; but on the second trial, which was had at the February term, 1884, of the Mason county circuit court, the accused was found guilty, and sentenced to the penitentiary for a period of three years. As it does not appear any supersedeas was granted in the cause, it would seem the accused is now, and has been since his conviction, in the penitentiary, under the judgment of the court.
No evidence, other than that introduced by the People, was submitted to the jury on the trial of the cause. Defendant did not testify in his own behalf, nor did he offer any testimony whatever. Before the accused could be rightfully convicted, it should appear, from the evidence, he made an unlawful assault upon the prosecuting witness, with intent, feloniously and forcibly, to ravish and carnally know her against her will. Taking the account given of the affair by the prosecuting witness as the one to be most relied on, no very severe assault was made upon her by the accused. At the time the assault was made, it appears her husband was somewhere on the farm, and was at home during the day after it occurred, and although she and her husband slept at home the night after the assault, alone, with no one in the house except their little child, she never mentioned to him the fact the accused had assaulted her. The People gave in evidence the admissions of defendant made to John Otto, from which it appears that after the accused stopped at her house on that day, he and the prosecutrix talked about some matters relating to the possession of the farm she and her husband occupied, in which it seems a man by the name of Spilker was interested, and that he told her in the same conversation, in substance, if she would submit to his desires he would pay her for it. The conversation which the prosecuting witness herself says he had with her during the time the accused had hold of her, tends much more to show he intended to persuade her to submit to his guilty embrace rather than to carnally know her forcibly and against her will, which is necessary to constitute the offence with which he is charged. The intent, however, with which the unlawful assault is made in such cases is usually a question of fact for the jury to find, and with which the court seldom interferes.
But there are two reasons why it is thought the present judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Witte
...to have intercourse with a woman by force and against her will. (People v. Hiller (1955), 7 Ill.2d 465, 131 N.E.2d 25; Barr v. People (1885), 113 Ill. 471.) While these cases relate to the offense of assault with intent to commit rape (see Ill.Rev.Stat.1979, ch. 38, par. 8-4(a)), that offen......
-
State v. Andreason
... ... alleged confession in this case should not have been received ... in evidence for the reason that it was not voluntarily given ... (People v. Thompson, 84 Cal. 598, 24 P. 384; ... People v. Barric, 49 Cal. 342; 1 Green, Evidence, ... 219, footnotes on pp. 1291, 1292, 1293; Wharton, ... 658, 41 Am. Rep. 478; State v ... Hill, 181 N.C. 558, 107 S.E. 140; Commonwealth v ... Merrill, 14 Gray (Mass.), 415, 77 Am. Dec. 336; Barr ... v. People, 113 Ill. 471; Stevens v. People, 158 ... Ill. 111, 41 N.E. 856; Austin v. State (Miss.), 48 ... So. 817; Bell v. State, 61 Fla. 6, ... ...
-
People v. Dayani
...liability.' (People v. Greben, 352 Ill. 582, 186 N.E. 162. See also People v. Gambony, 402 Ill. 74, 80, 83 N.E.2d 321, and Barr v. People, 113 Ill. 471, 473.) This is done, again, for reasons of sound public policy and in the interests of justice, which must not be obstructed by a defendant......
-
Town of Scranton v. Henson
... ... with the ordinances of the town, but in no case to be ... inconsistent to the laws of the state ... Sec. 7 ... Peddlers and hawkers, proprietors or operators of dollar ... does not apply to criminal cases. See McMath v ... State, 55 Ga. 303; Barr v. People, 113 Ill ... 471; State v. Soper, 16 Me. 293 (33 Am. Dec. 665); ... Cecil v ... ...