State v. Jenks
| Citation | 268 P. 850,126 Kan. 493 |
| Decision Date | 07 July 1928 |
| Docket Number | 28,173 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. CHARLES JENKS, Appellant |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided July, 1928
Appeal from Lincoln district court; DALLAS GROVER, judge.
Judgment affirmed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
RAPE--Evidence--Testimony as to Indecent Liberties With Other Girls. In a prosecution for statutory rape it is not error to receive evidence to the effect that the defendant had taken immoral and indecent liberties with other young girls about the same time that the offense charged was committed, as it tends to show the lustful disposition of the defendant, and is admissible to corroborate other evidence of the prosecution.
John J McCurdy, of Lincoln, and James L. Haley, of Sabetha, for the appellant.
William A. Smith, attorney-general, Roland Boynton, assistant attorney-general, and Theodore M. Metz, county attorney, for the appellee.
Charles Jenks was prosecuted upon the charge of statutory rape upon Ida Lovin, a girl twelve years of age, and was found guilty. He appeals.
There appears to be sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and in fact the defendant makes no complaint of any lack of sustaining evidence, but bases his sole contention for reversal upon a ruling of the court permitting the introduction of evidence to the effect that he had taken immoral and indecent liberties with other young girls about the time of the offense charged against the defendant. It appears that defendant lived in a cabin on a street near a school building, and that school children passed his cabin on their way to school. He had the habit of giving young girls candy and small sums of money and had been inviting them to enter his cabin. Ida Lovin was requested by him to enter the cabin a number of times through a back door, and at each visit he gave her ten cents, and she testified that on two occasions he locked the door and had intercourse with her.
There was testimony that he invited Bernetta Garner, a young school girl, to enter his cabin by the same back door, saying that he would give her money if she did. She testified that when in the cabin he raised her dress and handled and played with her, and afterwards gave her a small sum of money. The only objection made to the testimony was the general one that it was incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. Cecil Hansen, another young school girl testified that he had invited her into the cabin several times; that he had her come through the back door, then he locked the door, put his hand under her clothes and upon her person, and that he gave her money on these occasions. The only objection to her testimony was, that some of the questions were leading and suggestive, and most of these were sustained. The objection raised on this appeal is that the evidence tended to prove another offense than the one charged in the information. That objection was not made in the trial court, but was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bracey v. United States
...332, 126 F.2d 849, and authorities there cited; Weaver v. United States, 55 App.D.C. 26, 29, 299 F. 893, 897. 11 State v. Jenks, 126 Kan. 493, 268 P. 850; State v. Shtemme, 133 Minn. 184, 158 N.W. 48; Suber v. State, 176 Ga. 525, 533, 168 S.E. 585, 589; State v. Cupit, 189 La. 509, 515, 179......
-
State v. Clements, 59135
...recent conduct of defendant toward other young girls was competent to show lustful disposition and system of operation; State v. Jenks, 126 Kan. 493, 268 P. 850 (1928), holding that evidence a defendant had taken indecent liberties with other girls was admissible in a prosecution for statut......
-
State v. Sauter, 9012
...this view are the following: Suber v. State, 176 Ga. 525, 168 S.E. 585; Taylor v. State, 55 Ariz. 13, 97 P.2d 543; State v. Jenks, 126 Kan. 493, 268 P. 850, citing State v. Stitz, 111 Kan. 275, 206 P. 910 and State v. Bisagno, 121 Kan. 186, 246 P. 1001; People v. Cosby, 137 Cal.App. 332, 31......
-
State v. Williams
..., at 168 n.228.8 Nor was this rule limited to prior criminal acts between the defendant and the victim. See, e.g., State v. Jenks , 126 Kan. 493, 268 P. 850, 851 (1928) (explaining evidence of a statutory rape committed upon another girl would be admissible to prove the defendant's "lustful......