State v. Dixon
Decision Date | 07 April 1927 |
Docket Number | 20319. |
Parties | STATE v. DIXON. |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2.
Appeal from Superior Court, Snohomish County; Bell, Judge.
James Dixon was convicted of rape, and he appeals. Affirmed.
E. C. Dailey and A. E. Dailey, both of Everett for appellant.
C. T Roscoe and Charles R. Denney, both of Everett, for the State.
The defendant, Dixon, was charged by two counts in one information: First, under section 2435, Rem. Comp. Stat. with the crime of rape, in that he 'did willfully unlawfully, and feloniously perpetrate an act of sexual intercourse with C_____ M_____ T_____, a female person over the age of 10 years, not the wife of said James Dixon, against her will and without her consent, the resistance of the said C_____ M_____ T_____ thereto being forcibly overcome;' and, second, under section 2436, Rem. Comp. Stat., with the crime of carnal knowledge of a female child, in that he 'did willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously carnally know and abuse C_____ M_____ T_____, a female child of the age of 17 years, not the wife of said James Dixon.' A trial in the superior court for Snohomish county sitting with a jury resulted in a verdict finding the defendant guilty of rape as charged in the first count. Judgment and sentence being rendered against him upon that verdict, he has appealed therefrom to this court.
It is contended in behalf of appellant that the information erroneously charged him with two separate crimes, not properly chargeable in one information. In so charging appellant, the prosecuting attorney was manifestly proceeding under section 2059, Rem. Comp. Stat., chapter 109, Laws of 1925, reading, so far as we need here notice its language, as follows:
'When there are several charges against any person, or persons, for the same act * * * of the same class of crimes or offenses, which may be properly joined, instead of having several indictments or informations the whole may be joined in one indictment, or information, in separate counts. * * *'
The crime of rape with which appellant was charged by the first count is defined by section 2435, Rem. Comp. Stat., as follows:
The crime of carnal knowledge of a female child with which appellant was charged by the second count is defined by section 2436, Rem. Comp. Stat., as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Murley
... ... 591, 595, 86 P. 951, 11 Ann.Cas. 95; State v ... Myrberg, 56 Wash. 384, 105 P. 622; State v. Beaudin, ... (sodomy), 76 Wash. 306, 307, 136 P. 137; State v ... Gay, 82 Wash. 423, 144 P. 711; State v ... Aldrick, 97 Wash. 593, 166 P. 1130; State v ... Dixon, 143 Wash. 262, 255 P. 109; State v ... Arnold, 144 Wash. 367, 369, 258 P. 20; State v ... Smith, 3 Wash.2d 543, 550, 101 [35 Wn.2d 238] P.2d 298 ; ... 60 A.L.R. 1148; 22 R.C.L. 1212 (7 Perm.Supp. 5291.) ... Appellant ... relies on this line of authority to ... ...
-
State v. Murley, 31015.
...76 Wash. 306, 307, 136 P. 137; State v. Gay, 82 Wash. 423, 144 P. 711; State v. Aldrick, 97 Wash. 593, 166 P. 1130; State v. Dixon, 143 Wash. 262, 255 P. 109; State v. Arnold, 144 Wash. 367, 369, 258 P. 20; State v. Smith, 3 Wash.2d 543, 550, 101 [35 Wn.2d 238] P.2d 298; 60 A.L.R. 1148; 22 ......
-
State v. Birgen, 10461-6-I
...containing the element of force, and we conclude that the prosecuting officer was within his privileges in so doing. In State v. Dixon, 143 Wash. 262, 255 P. 109 (1927), the court approved a two-count information charging forcible rape and carnal knowledge arising from a single act of inter......
-
State v. Harrison
...same effect. State v. Hensley, 75 Ohio St. 255, 79 N.E. 462, 9 L.R.A.,N.S., 277; State v. Houx, 109 Mo. 654, 19 S.W. 35; State v. Dixon, 143 Wash. 262, 255 P. 109; Commonwealth ex rel. Case v. Smith, 134 Pa.Super. 183, 3 A.2d 1007; State v. Hall, 214 N.C. 639, 200 S.E. 375. It is next claim......