Kaczmarzyk v. State
| Decision Date | 21 June 1938 |
| Citation | 280 N.W. 362,228 Wis. 247 |
| Parties | KACZMARZYK v. STATE. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Writ of error to the Municipal Court for Milwaukee County; C. M. Davison, Judge.
John Kaczmarzyk was convicted of rape, and he brings error.-[By Editorial Staff.]
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
The plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, sued out a writ of error to review a judgment of the municipal court for Milwaukee county, convicting him of the offense of forcible rape under sec. 340.46, Wisconsin Stats. The offense was alleged to have been committed on the 16th day of July, 1937, and the sentence was imposed on October 27, 1937.
The facts will be stated in the opinion.
A. Gawronski, of Milwaukee (Wm. B. Rubin, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.
Orland S. Loomis, Atty. Gen., and Herbert J. Steffes, Dist. Atty., Edward J. Yockey, Deputy Dist. Atty., and Charles J. Kersten, Asst. Dist. Atty., all of Milwaukee, for defendant in error.
Eleanor Kucay, the complaining witness, was a young woman twenty-two years of age and had had some association with one Henry Kazubowski prior to the night in question. On the night in question the defendant and Kazubowski were out driving with the complaining witness, Mr. and Mrs. Bolewski and two other girls. They went to the South Shore Beach and there had a quantity of liquor. The exact amount is in dispute. They then started to the Bolewski home taking the two other girls to their home first. When they arrived at the Bolewski home the complaining witness got out of the car and started to walk home. Mrs. Bolewski because of some remarks made to her by Kazubowski, was fearful that the complaining witness might be “picked up” as she described it and told her husband to go with them. He did go with them. They picked up the complaining witness and then drove to a point on Grange Avenue somewhere between 76th and 92nd Streets in the county of Milwaukee, where the occurrence complained of took place.
It is the contention of the complaining witness that Kazubowski struck Bolewski and knocked him out; that while this was going on the defendant held the mouth of the complaining witness shut, then took the complaining witness out of the car, dragged her down the highway a considerable distance, under a barb-wire fence, into an orchard and there without her consent had intercourse with her. She contends that the defendant made threats, that after the occurrence was over, they returned to the automobile when the defendant took her back a half block, threw her into a ditch and forcibly raped her; that they returned to the car and she was driven back to the Bolewski home. According to Mrs. Bolewski, when she arrived there, she asked Mrs. Bolewski to take her to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Mulhern
...character is more likely to consent to an act of sexual intercourse than is a woman who is strictly virtuous." Kaczmarzyk v. State, 228 Wis. 247, 249, 280 N.W. 362 (1938). A classic example of this defense tactic was addressed by the Indiana Supreme Court in Williams v. State, 681 N.E.2d 19......
-
Milenkovic v. State
...character is more likely to consent to an act of sexual intercourse than is a woman who is strictly virtuous." Kaczmarzyk v. State, 228 Wis. 247, 280 N.W. 362 (1938); State v. Muhammad, 41 Wis.2d 12, 162 N.W.2d 567 (1968); State v. Waters, 28 Wis.2d 148, 135 N.W.2d 768 (1965). We are unawar......
-
State v. Muhammad
...footnote 2.9 Id. 28 Wis.2d at page 155, 135 N.W.2d 768, 772, and cases cited therein.10 Supra, footnote 4.11 Kaczmarzyk v. State (1938), 228 Wis. 247, 249, 280 N.W. 362.12 (1938), 228 Wis. 235, 245, 280 N.W. 357.13 Id. at page 240, 280 N.W. at page 359. See also Loescher v. State (1910), 14......
-
State v. Waters
...v. State, supra, footnote 16, at page 299, 75 N.W. at page 991.23 (1933), 211 Wis. 565, 570, 248 N.W. 408, 410.24 Kaczmarzyk v. State (1938), 228 Wis. 247, 280 N.W. 362. ...