State v. Knighten
| Decision Date | 04 May 1901 |
| Citation | 39 Or. 63,64 P. 866 |
| Parties | STATE v. KNIGHTEN. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Josephine county; H.K. Hanna, Judge.
Alpha Knighten was convicted of rape, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Robt. G. Smith, for appellant.
D.R.N. Blackburn, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of rape by carnally knowing a female child under the age of 16 years. Objection was made to the introduction of any testimony for the state on the ground that the indictment does not state a crime because it does not allege that defendant was over the age of 16 years when it was alleged to have been committed. The statute (Sess.Laws 1895, p. 67) provides that, "if any person over the age of sixteen years shall carnally know any female child under the age of sixteen years," etc., he shall be deemed guilty of rape. It is argued that under this statute the age of the defendant is an essential ingredient of the crime, and must be averred in the indictment. But, as we understand the statute, its only effect is to raise the age of capacity of the male from 14, as it was at common law to 16, years. At common law, a boy under 14 years of age was conclusively presumed to be physically incapable of committing the crime of rape, but it was never held that it was necessary to allege the age of the defendant in an indictment for that crime. 16 Am. & Eng.Enc.Law, 315; Com. v. Scannel, 11 Cush. 547; Sutton v People, 145 Ill. 279, 34 N.E. 420; State v Ward, 35 Minn. 182, 28 N.W. 192. Nor is it necessary under the statute. If the defendant was below the requisite age, it is a matter of defense. Mr. Bishop says the age of the defendant need not be set out, Bish.St Crimes (2d Ed.) § 482. The statute of California provided that "any person of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall have carnal knowledge of any female child under the age of ten years, either with or without her consent, shall be adjudged guilty of the crime of rape"; and in People v. Ah Yek, 29 Cal. 575, it was held that an indictment silent as to the age of the defendant was good. Mr. Justice Sawyer, speaking for the court, said: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Bell
...of age. But this need not be stated in the indictment. State v. Nesmith, 136 Or. 593, 595, 300 P. 356 (1931); State v. Knighten, 39 Or. 63, 64 P. 866, 87 Am.St.Rep. 647 (1901); and there was adequate proof that defendant was over 16 (he testified that his son was 14 at this ...
-
State ex rel. Juvenile Dept. of Deschutes County v. Merritt
...of impotence, is a matter of defense. See Annot., 23 A.L.R.3d 1351 (1969). Reversed and remanded. 1 The child argues that State v. Knighten, 39 Or. 63, 64 P. 866 (1901), adopted the conclusive presumption of the common law. In the Oregon Criminal Code of 1971, 138 (1975 ed.), the Criminal L......
-
State v. Nesmith
... ... been a rule of pleading in this state that it is unnecessary ... to allege the age of the defendant in an indictment under a ... statute like section 14-220, Or. Code, 1930. We refer to the ... leading case of State v. Knighten, 39 Or. 63, 64 P ... 866, 87 Am. St. Rep. 647. The opinion in that case was ... rendered by [136 Or. 596] Mr. Chief Justice R. S. Bean, and ... is instructive and illuminating. In speaking for the court in ... that case, the learned justice wrote, among other things: ... ...
-
State v. Edy
...law in this state requiring the corroboration of the testimony of the prosecutrix before a conviction can be had in a case of rape. State v. Knighten, supra; State McPherson, 138 P. 1076, 69 Or. 381. Grace Gilman could not have been an accomplice of defendant. However, the sufficiency of th......