Lewis v. People, 16444

Decision Date25 June 1951
Docket NumberNo. 16444,16444
Citation124 Colo. 62,235 P.2d 348
PartiesLEWIS v. PEOPLE
CourtColorado Supreme Court

Richard H. Shaw, Denver, for plaintiff in error.

John W. Metzger, Atty. Gen., Bert M. Keating, Dist. Atty., Second Judicial District, William E. Doyle, Chief Deputy Dist. Atty., Denver, for defendant in error.

MOORE, Justice.

We will hereinafter refer to plaintiff in error as defendant.

An information in six counts was filed in the district court of the City and County of Denver, in which defendant was charged in the first four counts with offences under the so-called indecent liberties statute. In the fifth and sixth counts defendant was charged with having exhibited and published obscene and lewd photographs and drawings. The last two counts of the information were quashed by the trial court on motion of defendant's attorney upon the ground that they were improperly joined in the information relating to the alleged indecent liberties.

The charges as submitted to the jury were as follows:

First count. '* * * Robert Lewis, who was then and there a male person over the age of fourteen years, did unlawfully and feloniously assault a child, to-wit: * * * who was then and there under the age of sixteen years, and did unlawfully and feloniously take indecent and improper liberties with the person of such child; * * *'

Second count. '* * * Robert Lewis, who was then and there a male person over the age of fourteen years, did unlawfully and feloniously entice, allure and persuade a child, to-wit: * * * who was then and there under the age of sixteen years, into a room, office or other place for the purpose of taking immodest, improper, immoral and indecent liberties with the person of such child; * * *'

Third count. '* * * Robert Lewis, who was then and there a male person over the age of fourteen years, did unlawfully and feloniously take immodest, improper, immoral and indecent liberties with the person of a child, to-wit: * * * who was then and there under the age of sixteen years; * * *'

Fourth count. '* * * Robert Lewis, who was then and there a male person over the age of fourteen years, did then and there unlawfully and feloniously attempt to take immodest, improper and immoral and indecent liberties with the person of a child, to-wit: * * * who was then and there under the age of sixteen years; * * *'

The jury returned verdicts on each count of the information. Defendant was found not guilty as charged in the first, second and third counts, but was found guilty of the charge contained in the fourth count. The trial consumed several days, the record contains 1,647 folios and approximately 600 pages of typewritten matter. The district attorney, over the strenuous objection of counsel for defendant, offered in evidence approximately fifty photographs depicting lewd and obscene acts of sexual perversion. Numerous penciled sketches and drawings depicting homosexual acts of a highly depraved and indecent character also were admitted in evidence over the strenuous objection of defendant's attorney. All of these exhibits were found in the residence of defendant, and there was some testimony that they were shown to the prosecuting witness at various times during the evening of October 30, 1948, and the offence of which complaint is made is alleged to have taken place at about midnight on said date. The trial court admitted these photographs in evidence upon the theory that they constituted an inducement and were designed and intended to break down any resistance which the victim of the alleged indecent liberties might otherwise have had to any advances which defendant might have made. We find it unnecessary to determine whether error was committed in the admission of these exhibits.

This evidence relating to the taking of indecent liberties is very short and consists of not more than five folios and only two typewritten pages of the reporter's transcript. It was given by the prosecuting witness, a boy of the age of fourteen years. Since the defendant denied without qualification all of this testimony which tended to establish the charges relating to indecent liberties, and since by the verdict of the jury it found defendant not guilty of the offences charged in the first three counts of the information, it becomes important to examine carefully the testimony, to determine whether the verdicts of not guilty, returned by the jury, of necessity disposed of the controversy. Accordingly we set forth this testimony in detail:

'Q. I hand you a book which is marked for identification, People's Exhibit P-3. Would you look at that book and identify it, if you are able to do so? (Exhibit handed to witness.) A. This is the one he showed me.

'Q. Would you glance through the pages and state to the court and jury whether those photographs were in it at that time? Do you recall? A. (Looking at exhibit) Yes, sir, all these pictures were in there.

'Q. I believe you said he sat down and smoked a cigarette? A. Yes sir.

'Q. Were the lights out? A. Yes sir.

'Q. What occurred after that? A. That was after he showed me the book, and asked me to come over and sleep with him and I did.

'Q. Where was he sleeping? A. In the bunk.

'Q. Where was that with relation to the davenport where you were sleeping? A. Right opposite it.

'Q. Tell the court and jury exactly what happened after that? A. I had my clothes off, and he started playing with me, while I was asleep, and so I turned over, and he started playing with himself I guess, any way he squirted all over me, and I wiped myself off, and so I lay in bed for awhile, and I turned around and got out and went to the davenport.

'Q. What did he do with you? He was playing with you? A. Yes, sir.

'Q. What? A. Playing with my private parts.

'Q. He put his hands on your privates? A. Yes, sir.

'Q. You say, he squirted on you. Just tell the court and jury what occurred? (Objection overruled.)

'Q. The court says you may answer that; what happened? A. He squirted...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • U.S. v. York
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • August 23, 1978
    ...by any member of the armed forces).5 Kilpatrick v. State, 1973, 8 Div. 233, 51 Ala.App. 352, 285 So.2d 516 (dictum); Lewis v. People, 1951, 124 Colo. 62, 235 P.2d 348; People v. Lardner, 1921, 300 Ill. 264, 133 N.E. 375. The rule in Illinois has subsequently been changed by statute and now ......
  • Lightfoot v. State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1976
    ...concluded. See Hill v. State, 27 Ala.App. 160, 167 So. 606 (1936); People v. Stanton, 106 Cal. 139, 39 P. 525 (1895); Lewis v. People, 124 Colo. 62, 235 P.2d 348 (1951); Haney v. State, 64 Ga.App. 396, 13 S.E.2d 384 (1941); Chastain v. State, 62 Ga.App. 192, 8 S.E.2d 680 (1940); People v. C......
  • People v. Lehnert, Case No. 05SC916 (Colo. 8/13/2007)
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • August 13, 2007
    ...of some cause preventing the carrying out of the intent, would have resulted in the commission of the crime." Lewis v. People, 124 Colo. 62, 67, 235 P.2d 348, 350 (1951). By also making clear, however, that the overt act required for an attempt need not be the last proximate act necessary t......
  • People v. Yoshio Futamata
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • September 14, 1959
    ...the evidence is such that the jury must determine the case on the greater offense and that alone. An example of this is Lewis v. People, 124 Colo. 62, 235 P.2d 348, 351. There it was held that a conviction of attempt to take indecent liberties was unsupported by the evidence and could not s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT