Bracken v. State
| Decision Date | 25 June 1896 |
| Citation | 111 Ala. 68,20 So. 636 |
| Parties | BRACKEN v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Henry county; J. W. Foster, Judge.
Raleigh Bracken was convicted of the crime of seduction, and appeals. Affirmed.
The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted for the seduction of one Delia Roney. The state introduced evidence tending to show that the defendant was guilty as charged in the indictment. Ed Roney, as a witness for the state, testified that he was a brother of Delia Roney; that one day he went to the field where the defendant was at work and had a conversation with him; that at that time he had no weapon made no threats and held out no promises or inducements to the defendant, nor did he say that it would be better for him to tell all about it; that no one was present except the defendant and himself. The solicitor then asked the witness the following question: "State what the defendant said to you in that conversation?" The defendant objected to the question, because no predicate was laid upon which the confession could be properly admitted. The court overruled the objection, and the defendant duly excepted. The witness then testified to a confession made by the defendant in which he said that he had promised to marry Delia Roney, the sister of the witness. The other facts of the case, necessary to an understanding of the decision on the present appeal, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
Wm. C Fitts, Atty. Gen., for the State.
There was no error in allowing the prosecutrix to state that she told Judge Gordon, that her pregnancy resulted from an act of intercourse which the defendant had with her on the 17th June, 1894. Defendant had asked her on cross-examination, if she had not told Judge Gordon that she had been seduced by defendant on 17th June, 1894, to which she replied, she had not, and the question to her by the solicitor on the redirect examination was for her to state what that conversation was and what she told Judge Gordon. The defendant called for what he supposed it was, for the evident purpose of contradicting her, and she had the right to state what it was she told the judge. Railroad Co. v. Malone (Ala.) 20 So. 33.
The letters of defendant to the prosecutrix written after the date of the alleged seduction, were properly admitted in evidence. His handwriting was fully proved, and the genuineness of the letters was not denied. Their contents were of a criminative character against defendant, and tended to sustain the prosecution. Nor was there error in allowing the prosecutrix, in her examination, to state that she had received a letter from defendant between January and April 1893, in which he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Phillips v. Ashworth
... ... woman as described ... [124 So. 521] ... in seduction statutes: People v. Weinstock (Mag ... Ct.) 140 N.Y.S. 455; State v. Wallace, 79 Or ... 129, 154 P. 430, L. R. A. 1916D, 457; State v. Eddy, ... 40 S.D. 390, 167 N.W. 392; Wiley v. Fleck, 189 Iowa, ... 614, 178 ... seduction, and not to a subsequent distinct offense. All of ... them he denied, and denied having sexual intercourse with ... plaintiff. Bracken v. State, 111 Ala. 68, 20 So ... 636, 56 Am. St. Rep. 23; Whatley v. State, 144 Ala ... 68, 39 So. 1014. This is quite different from the ... ...
-
Tarver v. State
... ... begun because of his own criminal act. The question is not ... how far down the ladder she descended after having first ... erred, but whether or not she was chaste at the time the ... defendant induced her to yield her virtue to the satisfaction ... of his criminal passion. Bracken v. State, 111 Ala ... [85 So. 857.] Munkers v. State, 87 ... Ala. 94, 6 So. 357; Hussey v. State, 86 Ala. 34, 5 So ... A Mrs ... Scott testified in behalf of the defendant that in the latter ... part of February or the first of March she and a man, whose ... name she refused to ... ...
-
Cofield v. State
...was no error in overruling defendant's objection to the introduction of the letters offered by the state * * *.' In Bracken v. State, 111 Ala. 68, 20 So. 636, 637, a prosecution for seduction, the court 'The letters of defendant to the prosecutrix written after the date of the alleged seduc......
-
State v. Walker
...and their relations to each other are always competent. Underhill on Crim. Ev., pp. 665, 666; State v. Curran, 51 Ia. 112; Bracken v. State, 111 Ala. 68. The conduct relations of the parties are relevant to show that consent was obtained by promise and inducements, and what they consisted o......