Cox v. State

• Decision Date: 13 October 1931
• Docket Number: No. 26045.,26045.
• Citation: 177 N.E. 898,203 Ind. 544
• Parties: COX v. STATE.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

203 Ind. 544

177 N.E. 898

COX

v.STATE.

No. 26045.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Oct. 13, 1931.

Appeal from Bartholomew Circuit Court; Chas. S. Baker, Judge.

Arthur Cox was convicted of kidnapping, and he appeals.

Affirmed.Montgomery & Montgomery, of Seymour, for appellant.

James M. Ogden, Atty. Gen., and Merle M. Wall, of Indianapolis, for the State.

MARTIN, C. J.

Appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Indiana state prison under the 1929 kidnapping statute, which reads as follows: “Whoever kidnaps, or forcibly or fraudulently carries off or decoys from any place within this state, or arrests or imprisons any person, with the intention of having such person carried away from any place within this state, unless it be in pursuance of the laws of this state or of the United States, is guilty of kidnapping, and, on conviction, shall be imprisoned in the state prison during life.” Section 2426, Burns' 1929 Supp.

Appellant entered a plea of not guilty and a special answer of insanity, to which a reply in general denial was filed. The trial was by a jury, which returned a verdict of guilty as charged. The alleged error relied upon for reversal is the overruling of appellant's motion for a new trial, wherein he contends that the verdict is not sustained by sufficient evidence, and is contrary to law.

[1] The evidence of the state is as follows: On Sunday November 23, 1930, about 3:30 p. m. Gloria Jean Huffer, a seven year old girl, was playing with Julia May Aldrich, nine years old, in the yard of the latter's home in the city of Columbus. Appellant picked the Huffer child up in his arms in front of the house near the sidewalk. Immediately she began screaming and crying and kicking terribly to get loose. He forcibly put his hand over her mouth, leaving finger prints on her face and a big red place on her neck, and walked away straight and fast (some witnesses say he ran) with her down an alley. Immediately the Aldrich child screamed, and Mrs. Aldrich, who looked out and saw appellant pass the window, called to her husband, who immediately started in pursuit. Appellant carried the child ninety or ninety-five feet, then dropped her in the alley when Mr. Aldrich “hollowed” at him and started in pursuit, and then ran down the alley to where his automobile was parked. Several other men, who testified, hearing the screams and the alarm joined in the pursuit, blockaded the path of his automobile, and captured appellant. A city fireman arrested him, and he cursed and fought desperately with great strength until the police arrived and took him in custody. Appellant was somewhat under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and there was vomit all over his car.

Three physicians appointed by the court to examine appellant reported that they had examined him physically, asked him various questions to determine his intellectual knowledge of his own acts and his general attitude toward certain conduct and as to his intelligence in general, and that in their opinion he was on November 23, 1930, and at the time of the trial, a person of sound mind.

The defense by its examination of these physicians and by several other of its own witnesses adduced testimony to the effect that the appellant was a moral or sexual pervert; that he had on different occasions accosted a number of little girls 6 or 7 years old on the street, displayed his privates, performed sexual acts in their presence, and endeavored to persuade them to get into his automobile; that he had enticed a six year old girl by the offer of a nickel to go into a closet with him; and that previously he had been charged with the crime of rape on a nine year old girl. The appellant proved that he had stated to the examining physician that his sexual relations began when he was eight or nine years old with a little girl about that age, and he continued that as he grew older. Two of the physicians testified that his sex ideal was a small girl; that this perversion resulted from his experience and mental picture he has carried from...