Oakley v. State

• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: TYSON, J.
• Citation: Oakley v. State, 135 Ala. 29, 33 So. 693 (Ala. 1903)
• Decision Date: 05 February 1903
• Parties: OAKLEY v. STATE.

33 So. 693

135 Ala. 29

OAKLEY v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 5, 1903

Appeal from law and equity court, Walker county; W. B. Appling Judge.

Oscar Oakley was convicted of rape, and appeals. Reversed.

The opinion sufficiently shows the rulings upon the admission of evidence, and it is not deemed necessary to set out the evidence in detail. Suffice it to say, the evidence of the prosecutrix was to the effect that she was 12 years of age and that the rape was committed, and that the defendant had committed rape upon her twice, but that the occasion she was now testifying about was not the same to which she testified on the trial under the other indictment. The defendant admitted sleeping with the prosecutrix, but denied that he had ever had intercourse, or attempted to have intercourse with her.

Among the charges requested by the defendant were the following "(1) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that the humane provision of the law is that upon circumstantial evidence there should not be a conviction unless such evidence excludes to a moral certainty, and beyond all reasonable doubt, every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused; and, no matter how strong may be the circumstances, if they can be reconciled with the theory that the offense has not been committed, or, if committed that some other person did it, then the guilt of the defendant is not shown by the full measure of proof which the law requires and your verdict must be for defendant." "(11) The humane provision of the law is that upon circumstantial evidence there should not be a conviction unless to a moral certainty it excludes every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused." "(20) If the jury believe from the evidence that Mattie Oakley was under the age of fourteen years, they cannot find the defendant guilty of rape under the first count of the indictment." "(25) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if you find the defendant guilty as charged in the second count of the indictment, they must fix the punishment at a fine of not less than fifty nor more than five hundred dollars, and may affix an additional punishment of six months in the county jail. (26) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if you believe Mattie Oakley was over ten years of age at the time of the alleged offense you will find the defendant not guilty. (27) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if you believe from the evidence that Mattie Oakley was over the age of ten years at the time the alleged offense was committed, you will find the defendant not guilty under the second count of the indictment. (28) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that unless you believe beyond a reasonable doubt, and to a moral certainty, from the evidence, that the sexual organ of the defendant entered the sexual organ of Mattie Oakley, you will find the defendant not guilty." "(33) Gentlemen of the jury, if you believe the evidence, you must find the issue for defendant." "(30) If the jury find the defendant guilty under the second count of the indictment, it is their duty to fix the punishment at a fine of not less than fifty nor more than five hundred dollars, and they may impose a further punishment of six months' imprisonment in the county jail. (31) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if any member of the jury has a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant, and any other member of the jury does not have a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant, it is the duty of the jury not to return a verdict either way."...