Lee v. State
| Citation | 169 S.W. 963,114 Ark. 310 |
| Decision Date | 05 October 1914 |
| Docket Number | 150 |
| Parties | LEE v. STATE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; W. J. Driver, Judge; reversed.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
W. W Bandy, for appellant.
The cause should be reversed because of a fatal variance between the allegation in the indictment as to the location of appellant's house, and the proof thereof. The place or house of the appellant was descriptive of the offense, and should have been proved as alleged. 62 Ark. 459; 63 Ark. 312; 64 Ark. 188; Id. 235.
Wm. L Moose, Attorney General, and Jno. P. Streepey, Assistant, for appellee.
The act under which this prosecution is based does not make it material to show the particular place where the crime was committed, further than to prove that it occurred at some place in the State. Acts 1913, p. 407; 63 Ark. 312-314; Kirby's Dig., § 2229.
Appellant was indicted and convicted for a violation of what is known as the pandering act, for enticing Clarissa Grubbs, a female under the age of sixteen years, to become an inmate of an assignation place and engage in a life of prostitution, the indictment charging this place, to-wit:
"The home of her, the said Mrs. Lee, * * * said home then and there being situated on Lake Street, in the city of Paragould, Greene County, Arkansas, which said house was then and there a place where prostitution was practiced, encouraged and allowed," etc.
The testimony is otherwise sufficient to show the commission of the offense, but it is claimed that there is a variance in the proof, the only testimony introduced showing that the home of Mrs. Lee, or her house, was situated, not on Lake Street, in the city of Paragould, as charged, but upon a short street in that vicinity, and the majority of the court are of the opinion that the contention should be sustained.
The offense charged in this indictment is one of a local character or nature, consisting of enticing a female under age to visit or become an inmate of a place where prostitution is practiced, or an assignation house, and the place was properly descriptive of the offense, it being necessary to allege a place. Bryant v. State, 62 Ark. 459, 36 S.W. 188; Jenks v. State, 63 Ark. 312, 39 S.W. 361; Adams v. State, 64 Ark. 188, 41 S.W. 423; Keoun v. State, 64 Ark. 231, 41 S.W. 808.
In Keoun v. State, supra, the court said: "Where an indictment contains a necessary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smedley v. State
...that either of them were single. The burden was on the State to prove the allegation. 35 Cyc. 1345; 93 Cal. 74; 108 Mo. 658; 1 Wis. 209; 114 Ark. 310; 8 R. C. L. 3. There was no corroboration of the prosecutrix, unless it be certain admissions of defendant. The admissions or confessions, if......
-
Hill v. State, 194.
...459, 36 S. W. 188; State v. Anderson, 30 Ark. 131; Shover v. State, 10 Ark. 259; Jenks v. State, 63 Ark. 312, 39 S. W. 361; Lee v. State, 114 Ark. 310, 169 S. W. 963; Adams v. State, 64 Ark. 188, 41 S. W. In the last case mentioned, it was said: "A description of the house in which the liqu......
-
Pritchett v. State
...Blackwell v. State, 36 Ark. 178; Bennett v. State, 62 Ark. 516, 36 S. W. 947; Keoun v. State, 64 Ark. 231, 41 S. W. 808; Lee v. State, 114 Ark. 310, 169 S. W. We do not think that the facts of this case come within the rule announced above, for there is a sufficiently distinct description o......
- Pritchett v. State