Pruett v. State
| Decision Date | 04 December 1926 |
| Docket Number | A-6143. |
| Citation | 250 P. 1029,35 Okla.Crim. 359 |
| Parties | PRUETT v. STATE. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
The general rule that proof of other offenses is inadmissible unless a part of the res gestæ does not apply to offenses involving illicit sexual intercourse, and evidence of other acts between the same parties is admissible, not as affording proof of a substantial offense in themselves, but as corroborating other evidence of the act charged, and as tending to show the relations existing between the parties as bearing upon the probability of the commission of the crime charged.
In a prosecution for incest, evidence tending to establish acts of incest at times other than, and prior to, that relied on for the conviction is admissible, as indicating continuousness of the illicit relation and as tending to corroborate the testimony of the prosecutrix as to the particular act relied on for conviction.
In a prosecution for incest, whether there was any corroborating testimony supporting the prosecuting witness was a question of law for the court, but its sufficiency was a question of fact for the jury.
In a prosecution for incest, evidence held sufficient to justify submission to the jury of the question of the sufficiency of the evidence corroborating the prosecuting witness.
When a defendant seeks a reversal on account of an alleged error of the trial court in refusing to admit evidence offered, the record must show what this offered evidence would have been so that this court may determine whether or not it was material and proper testimony, and as to whether or not the defendant was injured by its exclusion.
In a prosecution for incest, committed with a daughter, evidence held sufficient to sustain verdict of guilty.
When a review of the record indicates that substantial justice would be conserved by modifying the punishment imposed by the trial court by reducing the sentence, this court will make such modification and affirm the judgment as modified. The entire record and all of the circumstances disclosed will be considered for the purpose of enabling the court to reach a just conclusion on this phase of the case.
Appeal from County Court, Ottawa County; J. J. Smith, Judge.
W. A Pruett was convicted of incest, and he appeals. Modified and affirmed.
F. R Burns and E. G. Avery, both of Miami, for plaintiff in error.
George F. Short, Atty. Gen., and Leverett Edwards, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
In the information in this case, filed in the district court of Ottawa county, July 30, 1925, W. A. Pruett was charged with the crime of incest, alleged to have been committed with Stella Pruett, his daughter, in said county, on or about the 27th day of April, 1925. A trial was had thereunder September 23, 1925. The verdict was guilty as charged, leaving the punishment to be fixed by the court. A motion for new trial was duly filed, also an amended motion, which motions were overruled. The court then rendered judgment and sentenced the defendant to be confined in the state penitentiary for a term of eight years. From the judgment and sentence he appeals to this court.
The errors assigned are based on the admission and exclusion of certain evidence, and it is contended that there was no testimony which tended to corroborate the prosecutrix. Upon the trial, she testified that her age was 18 years; that on Monday, April 27, 1925, she left Zincville with her father and went to Cardin, where he rented rooms in Keener's rooming house, and that night they had sexual intercourse in her room; that that was only one of many other such acts by the defendant; that at first he accomplished such acts by force; that on one occasion she was at the home of Mary Pruett, her aunt, and there engaged in sexual intercourse with her father, and a minute or two later her aunt came into the room.
Mary Pruett testified that her husband is a brother of the defendant; that their home is in Hockerville; that Christmas week, 1924, the defendant and his daughter Stella visited at her home a few days; one day her husband went to work and she with her little girl visited her mother's that forenoon; that on returning to her home about 11 o'clock she looked into her bedroom and saw the defendant standing by the side of the bed, and he walked to the window; that his daughter Stella jumped up and was fixing her clothing around her waist as she ran into the kitchen.
At the close of the evidence for the state, the defendant moved for a directed verdict in the form of a demurrer to the evidence, which was overruled.
The defendant testified that he married in 1904 at Farmington, Mo., and three daughters were born to this marriage, one older and one younger than the complaining witness; that during the year 1916 he went to Illinois, and while he was gone his wife ran away with another man, leaving the children with other families; that when he returned he gathered up the children and they lived in several towns in Missouri, and the oldest girl married; that he lived at Zincville about three years and on Monday, April 27th, he went to Cardin with his daughter Stella and rented three rooms; that they occupied the rooms five days; that she left him Saturday; that night he went to Joplin, returning to Zincville Sunday, and that evening was arrested on this charge; that he had had trouble with his daughter Stella while at Zincville because he objected to her going with a married man. He denied ever having illicit relations at any time with his daughter Stella; that when they visited his brother at Hockerville there were no improper relations; that he remembers that his sister-in-law came into a room there when he was helping his daughter to fasten her brassiere in the back with some lace; that he went with his daughter and Jess Payne to a show the first night they were in Cardin, and when they returned to their rooms his daughter went down stairs with Jess Payne and was gone for about a half hour; that when she returned she told him that she was going to marry Jess Payne; that on Friday they had trouble because he objected to her going to stay with Ossie Kitten, who is a half sister to Jess Payne; that in February, 1925, they got into a little trouble, and she tried to drink some wood alcohol that he had there to light the stove and a crowd gathered around there, and he asked Mr. Nichols, deputy sheriff, to take charge of her.
On predicate laid on cross-examination of prosecutrix, Mrs. R E....
To continue reading
Request your trial