Troyer v. State ex rel. Nichols
| Decision Date | 22 June 1888 |
| Docket Number | 13,320 |
| Citation | 17 N.E. 569,115 Ind. 331 |
| Parties | Troyer v. The State, ex rel. Nichols |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From the Howard Circuit Court.
The judgment is reversed, with costs.
J. C Blacklidge, W. E. Blacklidge, M. Bell, W. C. Purdum and B. C H. Moon, for appellant.
J. M Fippen, B. F. Harness and D. A. Woods, for appellee.
The relatrix complained of Joseph E. Troyer, and charged that she had been delivered of a bastard child on the 3d day of September, 1885, of which the defendant was the putative father.
The trial in the circuit court resulted in a finding and judgment against the appellant.
The relatrix testified at the trial that the appellant was the father of the child of which she had been delivered, and that she was a domestic, residing in his family at the time it was begotten.
She testified further that illicit relations existed between herself and the appellant during a considerable portion of the time she resided in his family, and that the appellant was in the habit of leaving the bed and room in which he and his wife slept, and of coming to her bed in a room near by.
The appellant persistently and emphatically denied having had any improper relations with the relatrix at any time or place. It appeared that there were but four apartments, and those on the same floor, in the house temporarily occupied by the appellant and his family and hired help.
The defence insisted that illicit intercourse could not have been had and carried on by the appellant with the relatrix in the manner and under the circumstances detailed by her, without detection owing to the proximity of the appellant's wife and other members of the family. There was reasonable ground to suspect the truth of the relatrix's story. A bill of exceptions recites that the plaintiff's counsel, during his closing argument to the jury, used the following language:
"I well recollect how Mr. Bell told a jury of Howard county, when he was attorney for the plaintiff, how Joshua Freeman got up out of his bed and slipped into the room of Mary Sleeth." This statement was objected to, but the court seems not to have given the objection any attention.
The bill of exceptions shows further, that another bastardy suit had been tried at the same term of court, in which Mary Sleeth appeared as the relatrix, and Joshua Freeman as defendant, and that a Mr. Lindley, one of the jurors in the case on trial, was also a juror in the case referred to, and that the Mr. Bell referred to by counsel was the attorney for the relatrix in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perez v. Territory of Arizona
...law presumes error. State v. Bokien, 14 Wash. 403, 44 P. 889-893; Nelson v. Welch, 115 Ind. 270, 16 N.E. 634, 17 N.E. 569; Troyer v. State, 115 Ind. 331, 17 N.E. 569. E. Clark, Attorney General, and George H. Crosby, Assistant District Attorney, for Respondent. Appellants must show that the......
-
Burgett v. State
...evidence of Burgett's guilt, and the outcome of the case would not appear to be changed by the Prosecutor's remark. Troyer v. State (1888), 115 Ind. 331, 17 N.E. 569; Garrett v. State (1973), Ind.App., 300 N.E.2d ISSUE THREE. CONCLUSION--It is our opinion that Burgett was not prevented from......
-
Evans v. State
...effect on the outcome of the case. If the evidence is 'close', reversible error will more likely be found.' See also, Troyer v. State (1888), 115 Ind. 331, 17 N.E. 569. Prosecuting witness Fults first made the reference to Evans' two companions as 'robbers'. The deputy prosecutor picked up ......
-
Telfare v. State
...no apparent effect on the outcome of the case. If the evidence is 'close', reversible error will more likely be found. Troyer v. State (1888), 115 Ind. 331, 17 N.E. 569. As shall hereinafter appear, the evidence against Garrett, if believed, cannot be characterized as close.' (300 N.E.2d at......