Parramore v. State

• Decision Date: 25 April 1921
• Citation: 88 So. 472,81 Fla. 621
• Parties: PARRAMORE et al. v. STATE.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

88 So. 472

81 Fla. 621

PARRAMORE et al. v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

April 25, 1921

Error to Circuit Court, Jackson County; C. L. Wilson, Judge.

Adam Parramore and Annie Brooks were convicted of unlawful cohabitation, and they bring error.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Motion to quash indictment should he brought up by record proper and not by bill of exceptions. A motion to quash an indictment should be evidenced to the appellate court by the record proper, and not the bill of exceptions, and if not so evidenced will not be considered.

Indictment charging negro woman and white man with occupying same room held to charge continuing offense. An indictment against a negro woman and white man for violating the provisions of section 3533, General Statutes 1906, prohibiting such persons of opposite sexes from habitually living in and occupying the same room in the nighttime, charges a continuing offense although the allegation was that on a certain day the man and woman habitually lived in and occupied the same room in the nighttime.

State must prove that habit of living together had been formed two years preceding indictment. Where a negro woman and white man are charged with the offense of habitually living in and occupying the same room in the nighttime, it is necessary for the state to prove that the habit of so living together had been formed by them, and was practiced within two years preceding the date alleged in the indictment.

Evidence of misconduct more than two years before date charged admissible. Where a continuing offense is charged in an indictment, evidence of acts and conduct of the defendant which occurred more than two years before the date alleged in the indictment, are admissible to show the formation of a habit continuing into the period in which the statute does not bar the prosecution.

COUNSEL

James H. Finch, Thomas E. Walker, and Paul Carter, all of Marianna, for plaintiffs in error.

Rivers H. Buford, Atty. Gen., and J. B. Gaines, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

ELLIS J.

The plaintiffs in error were indicted for an alleged violation of section 3533 of the General Statutes of Florida 1906, prohibiting a white man and negro woman, or white woman and negro man, from habitually living in and occupying the same room in the nighttime. The indictment charged that----

'Adam Parramore and one Annie Brooks, of the county of Jackson and the state of Florida, on the 5th day of July in the year of our Lord 1920, in the county and state afforesaid, he, the said Adam Parramore, then and there being a white man, and she, the said Annie Brooks, then and there being a negro woman, and not married to each other, did then and there unlawfully habitually live in and occupy in the nighttime the same room.'

The defendants pleaded not guilty. There was a verdict of guilty, and to the judgment of the court they took a writ of error.

The first assignment of error attacks the court's ruling in denying the motion to quash the indictment. The motion is not evidenced by the record proper, and the assignment will not be considered. See Raines v. State, 42 Fla. 141, 28 So. 57; Hearn v. State, 43 Fla. 151, 29 So. 433; Olds v. State, 44 Fla. 452, 33 So. 296; Houston v. State, 50 Fla. 90, 39 So. 468; Johnson v. State, 51 Fla. 44, 40 So. 678; Tipton v. State, 53 Fla. 69, 43 So. 684; Bell v. State, 61 Fla. 6, 54 So. 799.

The second, third, and fourth assignments of error attack the verdict as being unsupported by the evidence. The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict. While there is little or no direct evidence of the two defendants occupying the same room at night, the circumstantial evidence was quite sufficient to support that conclusion. According to the witnesses the house has two rooms and a shed room. The north room contains two beds and was occupied by the defendants who were not married to each other. The south room contains two beds, and was occupied by Annie's mother, an old woman who sleeps in one of the beds. The defendants kept their clothes in the north room, and several witnesses testified that they had visited the house in the daytime and saw Annie in one of the beds sick; at other times when they visited the house they saw Adam occupying the other bed. A narrow passageway separates the house from two other rooms, one of which is the dining room and the other the kitchen. Witnesses testified that the two defendants had occupied the north room together for many years. One witness testified that the defendants slept together; another said that about six years before he went to the house early and called. Annie came to the door in her nightclothes and Adam was in bed. There was only one room to the house then. Other witnesses testified to the habitual use of the room by...