Lewis v. State
Decision Date | 27 November 1923 |
Docket Number | 3818. |
Citation | 120 S.E. 124,156 Ga. 862 |
Parties | LEWIS v. STATE. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The charge being rape, and the evidence, if credible, showing conclusively that the carnal connection was complete, and that the offense of rape was actually perpetrated, the court did not err in failing to charge the law applicable to assault with intent to commit rape, or assault and battery or a mere assault. Kelsey v. State, 62 Ga. 558; Johnson v. State, 73 Ga. 107 (2); Harris v State, 101 Ga. 530, 29 S.E. 423; Welborn v State, 116 Ga. 522, 42 S.E. 773; Canida v. State, 130 Ga. 15 (1), 60 S.E. 104; Moore v. State, 151 Ga. 648, 108 S.E. 47.
The evidence of the female alleged to have been raped shows that carnal knowledge of her by the defendant was complete, and was sufficient to have authorized the jury to find that she had been actually raped by the defendant, but did not authorize a finding of a mere assault with intent to commit rape, or a mere assault and battery, or a mere assault. The other evidence introduced on the trial would not have authorized the jury to find that he did not have complete carnal knowledge of the female. It corroborates, and does not contradict, the testimony of the female that such carnal knowledge was complete. For this reason the court did not err in failing to charge the law applicable to any of the above lesser offenses.
The charge: "Now, gentlemen, I charge you this principle of law: The accused could not be convicted upon the woman's testimony alone, however positive it may be, unless corroborated by circumstances"--was not error, as contended, on the grounds that it "is inaccurate and misleading; it fails to refer to the testimony of the one assaulted; it fails to explain what circumstances are referred to, and does not explain what circumstances, facts, testimony, or evidence will be sufficient corroboration of the facts and evidence given by the one assaulted; that such reference to the 'woman's testimony' is confusing and misleading, because several witnesses who testified for the state were women; and because it does not charge the correct rule of law that the defendant cannot be convicted of rape upon the testimony of the person assaulted alone, unless her testimony is corroborated by other evidence."
There is sufficient evidence to support the verdict.
Error from Superior Court, Muscogee County; Geo. P. Munro, Judge.
A. L. Lewis was convicted of rape, and he brings error. Affirmed.
An indictment for the offense of rape charged that A. L. Lewis, on a stated day, in Muscogee county, "did then and there, unlawfully and with force and arms, have carnal knowledge of Mattie Mae Lewis, a female, forcibly and against her will, contrary to the laws," etc. The jury returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty and recommending him to the mercy of the court. The defendant made a motion for a new trial, which being overruled, he excepted. A substantial statement of the evidence follows:
The defendant and his family moved from another county to Muscogee county. The defendant and his daughter Mattie Mae, the alleged injured female, went in advance of the other members of the family, and became mill employees working at different mills. After arrival in the county, they boarded for a while at one place and then at another. At the latter place they occupied a room, in which were two beds. Finally a place of abode was obtained in Bibb City, a village in the county of Muscogee, and they were joined by the other members of the family. The place of abode was one side of a small building, separated from the other side by a partition. The other side of the house was occupied by J. Thomas and his family. Mattie Mae Lewis testified on direct examination that she was 17 years of age, and substantially as follows:
She was sleeping in a bed with with her sister Laura, 16 years of age, in a room adjoining the room of her mother. Her sister Lois, 12 years of age, and other children, were sleeping in a different bed in the same room. About 2 o'clock in the morning the defendant came in his night clothes to witness' bed and had intercourse with her. When he started to leave, witness started to get up, and he returned, and knocked a slat out of the bed, and slapped witness, because she had waked one of the children by "holloaing to get them to go with" her to wash her nose, that was bleeding on account of having been slapped by the defendant. While the intercourse was going on, the defendant had his knife in his right hand down by witness' side, and after the intercourse he drew his knife on witness and threatened to kill her if she told anybody. She did not holloa, because she was afraid. After the intercourse the defendant remained in the room and "made us get up," and the rest of the night laid in a chair before a fire with his head in witness' lap and his feet in the lap of witness' sister Laura.
On cross-examination witness testified:
On redirect examination the witness testified:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Baker v. State, 47419
...no error in failing to charge on a lesser included offense. See, for example, Moore v. State, 151 Ga. 648(5), 108 S.E. 47; Lewis v. State, 156 Ga. 862(1), 120 S.E. 124; Gorman v. State, 183 Ga. 307, 309, 188 S.E. 455; Bowen v. State, 188 Ga. 28(1), 2 S.E.2d 637; Smith v. State, 228 Ga. 293,......
-
State v. Gatlin
... ... DuRant, ... 87 S.C. 532, 70 S.E. 306; State v. Jones, 133 S.C ... 167, 130 S.E. 747; State v. Bush, 156 S.C. 526, 153 ... S.E. 490; State v. Hutto, 159 S.C. 185, 156 S.E ... 355; and State v. Johnson, 187 S.C. 439, 198 S.E. 1 ... A precise precedent is the Georgia decision of Lewis v ... State, 156 Ga. 862, 120 S.E. 124. A very complete ... discussion of the point and review of the authorities occur ... in the elaborate opinion in the unusually interesting case of ... Sparf and Hansen v. United States, 156 U.S. 51, 15 ... S.Ct. 273, 39 L.Ed. 343, in which the trial ... ...
-
Haney v. State
...was completed, see Johnson v. State, supra; Jones v. State, 68 Ga. 760 [4]; Moore v. State, 151 Ga. 648 [5], 108 S.E. 47; Lewis v. State, 156 Ga. 862, 120 S.E. 124; Byrd v. State, 28 Ga.App. 504, 111 S.E. Leverett v. State, 20 Ga.App. 748 [1], 93 S.E. 232). The component parts of the attemp......
-
Rider v. State
...guilty at all, was guilty of the completed major offense, it is not error to fail to charge as to the lesser offense. Lewis v. State, 156 Ga. 862(1), 863, 120 S.E. 124, and cit.; Welborn v. State, 116 Ga. 522(2), 524, S.E. 773; Whitley v. State, 188 Ga. 177, 178(2), 3 S.E.2d 588. Accordingl......