Dykes v. State
Citation | 1 So.2d 754,30 Ala.App. 129 |
Decision Date | 22 April 1941 |
Docket Number | 4 Div. 665 |
Parties | DYKES v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
J.N. Mullins, of Dothan, for appellant.
Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and Francis M. Kohn, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
Criminal abortion, the offense charged by indictment, against this appellant, is generally regarded as a heinous crime; and, is made a felony under the laws of this State. Section 3191 of the Code 1923, provides: "Any person who wilfully administers to any pregnant woman any drug or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means to induce an abortion, miscarriage, or premature delivery, or aids, abets or prescribes for the same unless the same is necessary to preserve her life and done for that purpose, must, on conviction, be fined not more than five hundred dollars and imprisoned in the penitentiary for not less than two nor more than five years."
Upon the trial of this case, in the court below, the defendant was convicted and judgment of conviction was duly pronounced and entered, from which this appeal was taken.
We find, that the evidence adduced upon the trial was probably without parallel; and, could properly be termed atrocious loathsome and morbid, depicting as it does a state of unlawful facts, horrible, repulsive, flagrant and vicious in the extreme. All the facts were without dispute or conflict. The defendant offered no testimony.
We will not sully the court's records and reports by a recitation of the evidence in full, it being of the nature and character hereinabove indicated; but we deem it necessary to state the tendency of the State's evidence in connection with the adjudication or decision of the single proposition of law upon which this appeal is rested.
Mrs. Hassie Spann, upon whom the alleged abortion was committed, as the indictment charges, testified directly and emphatically that this appellant came to her house, at the joint request of her husband and herself on the night in question, and in the presence of her husband committed the abortion upon her and as a result of which she delivered, in about two days thereafter, a dead child. That she had been pregnant about five months. That it was not necessary for Mr. Dykes to perform that operation on her to preserve her life. And on cross-examination, this witness testified:
Witness Wess Spann, husband of Hassie Spann, was next introduced by the State, and his testimony corroborated that of his wife in every particular. He testified, among other things:
And on cross-examination he stated, among other things:
In addition to the foregoing, the State introduced as a witness Dr. C.T. Jones, whose qualifications as a physician were admitted by the defendant. This witness, among other things, testified:
In concluding its case, the State offered a written confession of the defendant, and after several objections, motions etc., by the defendant, to the introduction of said confession, the trial court held that paragraphs five and nine, only, would be admitted. Sections five and nine are as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Arthur v. State
...fact nor go to every material fact stated by the accomplice. Bridges v. State, 52 Ala.App. 546, 295 So.2d 266 (1974); Dykes v. State, 30 Ala.App. 129, 1 So.2d 754 (1941). Corroborative evidence need not directly connect the accused with the offense but need only tend to do so. State v. Cana......
-
Belcher v. State
...and thus sustain a conviction.’ 23 C.J.S. Criminal Law § 1369 (2006) (footnotes omitted). See also Dykes v. State, 30 Ala. App. 129, 133, 1 So. 2d 754, 756–57 (1941) (citations omitted) (explaining that ‘[i]t has been repeatedly held, and advisedly so, that the corroboration of the testimon......
-
Kuenzel v. State
...fact nor go to every material fact stated by the accomplice. Bridges v. State, 52 Ala.App. 546, 295 So.2d 266 (1974); Dykes v. State, 30 Ala.App. 129, 1 So.2d 754 (1941). Corroborative evidence need not directly connect the accused with the offense but need only tend to do so. State v. Cana......
-
Griffin v. State
...fact nor go to every material fact stated by the accomplice. Bridges v. State, 52 Ala.App. 546, 295 So.2d 266 (1974); Dykes v. State, 30 Ala.App. 129, 1 So.2d 754 (1941). Corroborative evidence need not directly connect the accused with the offense but need only tend to do so. State v. Cana......