Braswell v. State, (No. 191.)

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
Writing for the CourtSmith
Citation280 S.W. 367
Decision Date22 February 1926
Docket Number(No. 191.)
280 S.W. 367
(No. 191.)
Supreme Court of Arkansas.
February 22, 1926.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Union County; L. S. Britt, Judge.

John D. Braswell was convicted of assault with intent to rape, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Powell, Smead & Knox, of El Dorado, for appellant.

H. W. Applegate, Atty. Gen., and Jno. L. Carter and Darden Moose, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.


Appellant was indicted for having assaulted Lona Mae Carder, a female, with the intent to rape her, and upon his trial was convicted and given a sentence of 5 years in the penitentiary, and has appealed.

The chief insistence for the reversal of the judgment is that the testimony is insufficient to support the verdict, in that it was not shown that appellant intended to have sexual intercourse with the female named in the indictment forcibly and against her will.

The prosecutrix testified: That she was born February 3, 1909, and was 15 years old in December, 1924, at which time she was employed as an assistant to her sister, who was the telephone operator at Calion. That she wished to go to El Dorado to change a dress, and appellant, who was in Calion, offered to drive her over there. A man named Murphy was in the car with appellant, and the older sister of the prosecutrix consented for her to accept the invitation, and she was driven by appellant in his car to El Dorado. When they arrived in El Dorado, Murphy left the car, and appellant stated he would drive witness to the store where the dress could be changed. When witness discovered that appellant was not driving towards the store, she asked where he was

Page 368

going, and he answered that he thought he would first drive around the city. He kept driving, and said he would show her the new hospital and the homes in that neighborhood. They drove on until they left the paved roads, and witness asked appellant to take her back to El Dorado, but he kept on driving and talking, and told witness he did not have to return to El Dorado until 4 o'clock in the afternoon. Appellant finally came to a small road, into which he turned, and then he left this road and drove into the woods about 200 yards to a point where a hill on one side and some shrubbery on the other hid the car from view. Appellant then told witness that he was going to have sexual intercourse with her. Appellant first attempted to pull witness out of the car, and then to put her over on the rear seat. Failing in this, he undertook to have sexual intercourse in the front seat, and he continued this effort for a period of about two hours. During all this time witness protested and begged appellant to leave her alone and to carry her back to El Dorado, but appellant declared his intention to have sexual intercourse with her before he would carry her back to the city. His hands were all over her. He drew her dress up, got between her legs, unbuttoned his trousers, got down on his knees, and tried to have sexual intercourse with her, but without success. She screamed and cried and begged, but he would not desist. Appellant tried to stop witness from screaming by placing his hand over her mouth. He finally told her to scream as much and as loud as she pleased, as no one could hear her. He then told her if she did not stop screaming he would tear her to pieces, but she continued to scream and to resist appellant's efforts. Finally they heard some one knocking at an oil well, but appellant said there was no one at the well, but he finally desisted after struggling with witness for two hours or more, and drove her back to El Dorado. Witness was badly bruised, and was very sore for a period of three weeks.

Appellant testified: That he was a married man, and the father of three children, one...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • United States v. Lovely, Cr. No. 17107.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • May 14, 1948
    ...resistance encountered to accomplish the act, despite the unwillingness and resistance of the female." Braswell v. State, 170 Ark. 1192, 280 S.W. 367, 368. (Emphasis "To constitute a crime the act must, except in the case of certain statutory crimes, be accompanied by a criminal intent or b......
  • State v. Morrison, 5846
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • May 19, 1932
    ...126 Kan. 414, 268 P. 842; 33 A. L. R. 550; 74 A. L. R. 757; State v. Wheat, 166 Minn. 300, 207 N.W. 623; Braswell v. State, 170 Ark. 1192, 280 S.W. 367; Dillard v. State, 174 Ark. 1179, 298 S.W. 27; Blass v. People, 79 Colo. 555, 247 P. 177; Smith v. State, 148 Ga.App. 332, 96 S.E. 632; Nor......
  • Warford v. State, (No. 80.)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • December 19, 1927 considered in the light most favorable to the state, and it is sufficient to sustain the verdict. Braswell v. State, 170 Ark. 1192, 280 S. W. 367;1 White v. State, 164 Ark. 517, 262 S. W. 338; Cash v. State, 161 Ark. 75, 255 S. W. There was no error in allowing Al Faubus, the clerk, to t......
  • State v. Neville., 4789.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • November 18, 1943
    ...reason the assailant finally desisted, which may have been for one or more of several reasons. Braswell v. State, 170 Ark. 1192, 280 S.W. 367. Under point 2 appellant contends that it was error for the court to refuse to give his requested instruction No. 1 which was as follows: “The Court ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT