Harris v. State
| Decision Date | 24 February 1978 |
| Citation | 356 So.2d 623 |
| Parties | Stanley HARRIS v. STATE of Alabama. SC 2733. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
James E. Hedgspeth, Jr. of Floyd, Keener & Cusimano, Gadsden, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., Vanzetta Penn Durant, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
This is an appeal from a jury verdict, and judgment of the court, finding, and decreeing Stanley Harris to be the father of an illegitimate child, and ordering him to pay child support. We affirm.
In March, 1970, Harris, an adult single man, went to Bayou Coiffeur in Alabama City to get a haircut. There he met Mary Moore, an adult single woman. About two weeks later, he asked Mary for a date. They began dating, and a few months later they engaged in sexual intercourse, first at her apartment, then at other places, Birmingham, Atlanta, Miami, the beach at Panama City, and, Mary became pregnant. The pregnancy was aborted, and they resumed their sexual intimacies, once a week, sometimes twice on the weekends, and Mary became pregnant again. Harris asked her to abort. Mary refused, and a child was born unto her on June 30, 1973. After that Harris lost interest in Mary, but Mary did not lose interest in Harris. She would call him at home sometimes late at night at his job. She would follow him with or without his new girl friend; she would bang on the apartment door of Harris' friend when he was there; she would blow her automobile horn in the apartment complex when Harris was visiting his girl friend, and in general, harassed Harris as much as she could. Finally, the tempest subsided. She married and he married.
In a paternity proceeding Stanley Harris was determined to be the father of Mary's child, and ordered by the court to pay child support. The sole issue raised on appeal is the overruling of Harris' motion to dismiss the State's complaint. Harris contends that Alabama's paternity determination proceeding statutes deny the father of an illegitimate child equal protection of the laws. In short, Harris says that because Mary did not consent to have an abortion when he requested her to do so, coupled with the fact that he agreed to pay for the abortion, he has been denied any decision as to the birth of the child; therefore, he is not liable for the child's maintenance, care and education.
In Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 96 S.Ct. 2831, 49 L.Ed.2d 788 (1976) the United States Supreme Court was presented the question of the constitutionality of a Missouri statute requiring the husband's written consent of a wife seeking an abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, unless the abortion is certified by a licensed physician to be necessary in order to preserve the life of the mother. The appellants, there, contended that the statute afforded the husband the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People in Interest of S. P. B.
...v. M. J. B. C., 601 S.W.2d 475 (Tex.Civ.App.1980). Basing its decision on state law, the Alabama Supreme Court held in Harris v. State, 356 So.2d 623 (Ala.Sup.Ct.1978) that an unmarried father could no more escape his legal obligation to his child because its mother had refused to obtain an......
-
Ex parte Jones
...in this State that parental obligations do not differ with regard to whether the parents of the child are married. Harris v. State, 356 So.2d 623 (Ala.1978). In fact, we have held that "the ultimate objective of the [Uniform Parentage Act, Ala.Code 1975, § 26-17-1 et seq.,] is to promote fu......
-
Williams v. State
...the case of the illegitimate child, however, that right is not enforceable until a determination of paternity is made. See Harris v. State, 356 So.2d 623 (Ala.1978). The new act provides the child whose right to support is at stake with a procedural mechanism to enforce it--in his own At th......
-
Kim Shayo Buchanan, Lawrence v. Geduldig: Regulating Women's Sexuality
...486 U.S. 1308, 1309-10 (1988); Planned Parenthood of Cent. Mo. v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 69-71 (1976). 59 See, e.g., Harris v. State, 356 So.2d 623 (Ala. 1978); People in Interest of S.P.B., 651 P.2d 1213 (Colo. 1982); Dorsey v. English, 390 A.2d 1133 (Md. 1978); D.W.L. v. M.J.B.C., 601 S.W......
-
The Constitution and the rights not to procreate.
...of alleged infringement, some of the other arguments discussed in this Part would still be available. (95.) See, e.g., Harris v. State, 356 So. 2d 623, 624 (Ala. 1978) ("[T]his case presents the question of whether an unmarried man may unilaterally require his unmarried paramour to abort th......