Edens v. State

• Decision Date: 08 December 1897
• Citation: 43 S.W. 89
• Parties: EDENS v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

43 S.W. 89

EDENS v. STATE.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

December 8, 1897.

Appeal from district court, Hood county; J. S. Straughan, Judge.

Hugh Edens was convicted of rape, and appeals. Affirmed.

N. L. Cooper & Son and J. J. Hiner, for appellant. Mann Trice, for the State.

DAVIDSON, J.

Appellant was convicted of rape, and his punishment assessed at five years' confinement in the penitentiary; hence this appeal.

Appellant's first bill of exceptions is reserved to the action of the court in permitting the state to introduce a number of letters written to the alleged ravished female, and also a letter written by defendant to a friend,—one Wes White. The objections urged by appellant are several, and seem to be based upon the proposition that said letters were simply the confessions of defendant, which did not prove the corpus delicti; in other words, that, before the letters could be introduced in evidence, the state must prove the corpus delicti. The letters themselves show the fact that the appellant and the girl had been having clandestine meetings for the purpose of having sexual intercourse. We are at a loss to understand why this testimony was not admissible. If the statements in the letters are treated as confessions, they were clearly admissible, for defendant was not under arrest at the time they were written.

In appellant's second bill of exceptions he complains of the action of the court refusing to permit him to prove by the alleged injured female, who was at the time of the trial his wife, that in the latter part of January, 1897, at their first meeting in the woods, the question of her age was discussed between them, and that she then informed appellant that she was over the age of 15 years, and on the other occasions of their assignations she always told defendant that she was over the age of 15 years. On objection by the state, this evidence was ruled out. In this, we think, there was no error. The indictment alleged that at the time the sexual intercourse occurred between the parties the girl was under 15 years of age, and not his wife. The uncontradicted proof in the case shows that these were facts. The first act of intercourse occurred in the latter part of January, 1897, and was repeated at intervals for several months, until finally, to escape a prosecution, he married the girl on the 18th of August, 1897, she having become 15 years of age on the 10th of July previous to said marriage. "Where the offense is in having connection with a child under the age of consent, belief on the part of the defendant that she was over the age of consent, and that, therefore, consent on her part would prevent the act from being criminal, cannot be shown. Connection with a child under the age of consent being criminal, one who has connection with a female which would, in any event, be unlawful, must know at his peril whether her age is such as to make the act a rape." See McClain, Cr. Law, § 451. And see, also, Lawrence v. Com., 30 Grat. 845; State v. Newton, 44 Iowa, 45; State v. Houx, 109 Mo. 654, 19 S. W. 35; State v. Baskett, 111 Mo. 271, 19 S. W. 1097; Holton v. State, 28 Fla. 303, 9 South. 716; Reg. v. Prince, L. R. 2 Crown Cas. 154; State v. Grossheim (Iowa) 44 N. W. 541; People v. McDonald, 9 Mich. 150; Hays v. People, 1 Hill, 351; 2 Bish. Cr. Law, 1091; Bish. St. Crimes, § 490. Mr. Bishop says: "While, within principles explained in another connection, no one is ever punishable for any act in violation of law whereto, without his fault or carelessness, he was impelled by an innocent mistake of facts, this rule does not free a man from the guilt of his offense by reason of his believing, on whatever evidence, that the girl is above the statutory age. His intent to violate the laws of morality and the good order of society, though with the consent of the girl, and though in a case where he supposes he...