State v. Webb
| Decision Date | 12 December 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 27963.,27963. |
| Citation | 300 S.W. 706 |
| Parties | STATE v. WEBB. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Ripley County; Charles L. Ferguson, Judge.
Fred Webb was convicted of rape, and he appeals. Affirmed.
John A. Gloriod, of Poplar Bluff, for appellant.
North T. Gentry, Atty. Gen., and Smith B. Atwood, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The appellant was charged by information in the circuit court of Butler county with rape, under section 3247, R. S. 1919, Laws 1921, p. 284a. Upon a trial to a jury in Ripley county, where the case was tried on a change of venue, the appellant was convicted, and his punishment assessed at five years' imprisonment in the penitentiary. From this judgment he appeals.
The prosecuting witness testified that the appellant, after having accompanied her to a picture show at night, drove out with her in his automobile to a lone country schoolhouse and ravished her. Another young man and a girl went with them in the car to the schoolhouse, but left them temporarily on reaching it. When prosecutrix and the appellant were alone, he began to make improper advances, and holding her down on the ground, ravished her, despite her resistance to the utmost. While resisting, she called to the other couple for help, but received no response. After the outrage had been committed, the other couple appeared and prosecutrix told the girl what had occurred. On reaching her home in a distraught and disheveled condition, she informed her mother of the occurrence. The succeeding morning the mother took the prosecutrix to a physician, who examined her and found her vagina bruised and swollen and her hymen broken, indicative of a recent forcible sexual intercourse. Other fresh bruises were found on different parts of her body. There was testimony that the mental capacity of the prosecutrix was below normal, although she was physically well developed. The torn condition of her clothing when she reached her home the night after the assault was in evidence.
The appellant, testifying in his own behalf, stated that the prosecutrix forced herself upon him, and insisted on going out in his car. He admitted having had intercourse with her, but that it was with her consent, and that she offered no material resistance. The jury gave no credence to the testimony for the appellant.
I. The information conforms to the requirements of a charge of this character, as defined in section 3247, R. S., as amended by Laws 1921, p. 284a, and is not subject to tenable objection. While its insufficiency is urged in the motion for a new trial, this contention, having been abandoned in the appellant's brief, need not be noticed, except to comply with the statutory mandate (section 4106, R. S. 1919), requiring an examination of the record.
II. The verdict is supported by the facts and conforms to the applicable law as defined in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Shuls
...new trial does not prove itself. State v. Pinkard, 300 S.W. 748; State v. Thomas, 180 S.W. 886; State v. Cantrell, 6 S.W.2d 839; State v. Webb, 300 S.W. 706. (5) motion to quash an information is no part of the record proper and can be reviewed only when made a part of the record by being p......
-
State v. Cottengim
...testimony of Steele Turner. It is further corroborated by the testimony of Eugene Moody. The evidence supports the verdict. State v. Webb (Mo. Sup.) 300 S.W. 706 (3). punishment assessed by the jury is not excessive in view of the brutality of the act. Section 3247, Laws 1921, p. 284a. Ther......
-
State v. Cottengim
...testimony of Steele Turner. It is further corroborated by the testimony of Eugene Moody. The evidence supports the verdict. State v. Webb (Mo. Sup.) 300 S. W. 706 (3). The punishment assessed by the jury is not excessive in view of the brutality of the act. Section 3247, Laws 1921, p. 284a.......
- State v. Webb