State v. Haynes
| Decision Date | 12 January 1926 |
| Citation | 242 P. 603,116 Or. 635 |
| Parties | STATE v. HAYNES. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County; Geo. G. Bingham, Judge.
Elroy Haynes was convicted of statutory rape, and he appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
B. A. Kliks, of McMinnville, for appellant.
John H. Carson, Dist. Atty., of Salem ( Lyle J. Page, Deputy Dist. Atty., of Salem, on the brief) for the State.
The defendant was convicted of statutory rape, in that, as stated in the indictment, he did then and there unlawfully and feloniously carnally know and have illicit sexual intercourse with a named girl; she then and there being a female child under the age of 16 years; the said Elroy Haynes then and there being a man over the age of 16 years. Dissatisfied with the result of the trial, he has appealed.
The accusation follows the language of the statute defining the crime charged, and is sufficient. The cases of State v Eisen, 53 Or. 298, 99 P. 282, 100 P. 257, and State v. Gates, 98 Or. 110, 193 P. 197, are not in point, for they are instances where the defendant was accused of contributing to the delinquency of a minor child, and it was held that as the indictment showed the prosecutrix to be of marriageable age, and that, if married, she was no longer a minor, it was necessary for the accusation to show that she was not married; otherwise she could not be considered as within the statutory term of "minor child." As against the objection of the defendant that the girl may have been his wife, the charge is sufficient for another reason for it says that he had "illicit sexual intercourse" with her, which could not be the case if he was her husband. Besides this, whether or not they were married to each other at the time of the occurrence of the act charged in the indictment was peculiarly within the knowledge of the defendant, and if it was true he could have proven it and thus rebutted the charge.
The salient points in the narration for the state, condensed from an extremely tautological and garrulous record, are that the defendant and another young man engaged the company of the prosecutrix and her girl friend in Newberg, Yamhill county on Sunday, November 18, 1923, and went riding together in an automobile, of which the defendant was the driver. Over the objection of the defendant, the state was permitted to show that they first repaired to the residence of the other boy, where he went into the house and brought out a bottle of moonshine whisky, which the boys took with them and drank from frequently during the ride in the afternoon. After driving a while in Marion county, they left the road near the east approach to the bridge across the river between Marion and Yamhill counties, and went into the woods to a deserted house, where the prosecutrix alleges that the defendant had sexual intercourse with her. After a time spent there, they returned to Newberg and drove to Dundee, and the defendant was intoxicated as he drove the automobile. They had a collision with another machine, resulting in damage to the defendant's car so that it could not be driven. The prosecutrix and the others, the defendant being in an intoxicated condition so that he could hardly walk, returned on foot to Newberg.
The testimony about the defendant being drunk and about taking the liquor with them was objected to on account of its tendency to prove other crimes, viz. unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor and driving an automobile while intoxicated, but the objections were overruled and an exception noted. The rule is elementary that the defendant cannot be called upon to defend against any accusation other than that charged in the indictment, and that evidence of other crimes is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Paddock
...simply have shown that she made such a statement. Her oral declaration to that effect was not competent for that purpose. State v. Haynes, 116 Or. 635, 242 P. 603;State v. Rogers (Idaho) 283 P. 44. While we are aware that an accusation of this kind is easily made and hard to disprove, and t......
-
State v. Paddock
... ... relations with other men. But here the offered proof would ... not have established that she had had intercourse with John ... Broberg. It would simply have shown that she made such a ... statement. Her oral declaration to that effect was not ... competent for that purpose. State v. Haynes, 116 Or ... 635, 242 P. 603; State v. Rogers (Idaho) 283 P. 44 ... While ... we are aware that an accusation of this kind is easily made ... and hard to disprove, and that great liberality should be ... allowed in the cross-examination of prosecutrix, we cannot ... say ... ...
-
State v. Bell
...inadmissible: State v. Morrow, 158 Or. 412, 434, 75 P.2d 737, 76 P.2d 971; State v. McKiel, 122 Or. 504, 510, 259 P. 917; State v. Haynes, 116 Or. 635, 639, 242 P. 603; Annotation, 140 ALR 364, 365. As an exception to this rule, however, it is held that where, as here, medical testimony sho......
-
State v. Nab
...inadmissible: State v. Morrow, 158 Or. 412, 434, 75 P.2d 737, 76 P.2d 971; State v. McKiel, 122 Or. 504, 510, 259 P. 917; State v. Haynes, 116 Or. 635, 639, 242 P. 603; Annotation, 140 A.L.R. 364, 365. As an exception to this rule, however, it is held that where, as here, medical testimony ......