State v. Waymire

• Decision Date: 25 August 1908
• Citation: 97 P. 46,52 Or. 281
• Parties: STATE v. WAYMIRE et al.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

97 P. 46

52 Or. 281

STATE v. WAYMIRE et al.

Supreme Court of Oregon

August 25, 1908

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; C.U. Gantenbein, Judge.

Belle Waymire and another were convicted of an indecent and immoral act, in violation of B. & C. Comp. § 1930, and they appeal. Affirmed.

The charging part of the information is as follows: "That during all the times hereinafter mentioned the city of Portland, in the county of Multnomah, and state of Oregon was a municipal corporation existing in said state. That Harry Lane was at all of the times hereinafter mentioned the duly elected, qualified, and acting mayor of said city of Portland. That on the 26th day of September, A.D.1907, in the said city of Portland, county and state aforesaid, the said Belle Waymire and the said E.E. Radding, then and there willfully and unlawfully conspiring with each other committed an act which then and there grossly injured the person and property, to wit, the reputation, of another, and which then and there grossly disturbed the public peace, and which then and there openly outraged the public decency, and was then and there injurious to public morals, to wit: That the said Belle Waymire and E.E. Radding then and there so willfully conspiring, confederating, and agreeing thereto with the intent then and there to defame and blacken the reputation of him, the said Harry Lane, as aforesaid, and to falsely make it appear to the public that the said Harry Lane was then and there committing a crime, to wit, the crime of assault with intent to commit rape by the said Harry Lane as aforesaid, upon the person of her, the said Belle Waymire, by force and arms and against her consent, the said Belle Waymire did then and there in a public place, to wit, in the Hamilton Building, in the city of Portland, set upon him, the said Harry Lane, and grasp and hold his person, and tear and dishevel his clothing, and seek to indecently expose his person, and did make a loud outcry and falsely accuse to the persons who were then and there assembled at said public place as aforesaid the said Harry Lane of then and there attempting to forcibly ravish her, the said Belle Waymire against her consent. And the said Belle Waymire and the said E.E. Radding, so unlawfully and willfully conspiring together thereto as aforesaid, the said E.E. Radding in pursuance of the said conspiracy, confederation and agreement, and with the intent as aforesaid, did then and there willfully and unlawfully lie in wait in said public place, to wit, in said Hamilton Building, in said city of Portland, and did then and there, upon hearing the said outcry of the said Belle Waymire, break and shatter the door of the said Harry Lane's office in said building, in which the said Belle Waymire and he, the said Harry Lane, then and there were, and then and there attracted thereby a concourse of the citizens at said time and in said public place, who then and there witnessed the said pretended assault in said public place and heard the said accusation, and that the said acts of said Belle Waymire and of the said E.E. Radding, so unlawfully and willfully conspiring together in said public place, and with the intent as aforesaid, was then and there an act which grossly injured the person and property, to wit, the reputation, of the said Harry Lane as aforesaid, and which then and there grossly disturbed the public peace of the city of Portland, and which then and there openly outraged the public decency of the people of the said city of Portland and state of Oregon, and was then and there injurious to the public morals of the said city and state, and against the statutes in such cases made and provided."

The defendants were arrested and duly admitted to bail pending trial. They subsequently demurred to the information on the ground that the facts stated do not constitute a crime and that more than one crime is charged therein. The demurrer was overruled, defendants pleaded not guilty, and a trial was had. The cause was submitted to the jury, and they retired for deliberation about 5 o'clock in the afternoon; the court at the time notifying counsel to have the defendants in court to receive the verdict, if one should be rendered. The jury returned a verdict of guilty about one hour later, and neither of the defendants nor their counsel were in court at the time, and the verdict was received in their absence. A motion for a new trial was made, and defendants were sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail, from which judgment they appeal, assigning as errors the overruling of the demurrer to the indictment and the receiving of the verdict in the absence of themselves and their counsel.

Seneca Fouts, for appellants.

R.W. Montague, John Manning, and Geo. J. Cameron, for the State.

BEAN C.J. (after stating the facts as above).

It is contended that the acts charged in the indictment do not constitute a crime within the meaning of the statute under which the information was filed, and which provides "that if any person shall willfully and wrongfully commit any act which grossly injures the person or property of another, or which grossly disturbs the public peace or health, or which openly outrages the public decency and is injurious to public morals, such person, if no punishment is expressly prescribed therefor by this Code, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail not less than one month nor more than six months or by fine not less than fifty nor more than two hundred dollars." This statute was intended by its language to...