Walker v. State
| Decision Date | 21 June 1894 |
| Parties | WALKER ET AL. v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from criminal court, Pike county; William H. Parks, Judge.
Turner Walker and another were convicted of living in a state of adultery or fornication, and appeal. Affirmed.
The appellants, Turner Walker and Rachael Johnson, were indicted tried, and convicted of living in a state of fornication or adultery. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The portion of the general charge of the court to the jury to which an exception was reserved by each of the defendants was as follows: "If there was an understanding or agreement between the parties that they were to have sexual intercourse with each other, and that, in pursuance of such understanding or agreement, they did have sexual intercourse with each other, at their mutual convenience and pleasure then that is adultery, under the statute." The defendants requested the court to give to the jury the following charge, and duly excepted to the refusal to give the same: "If the evidence does not show anything more than an occasional act of illicit intercourse, although it was according to a previous understanding, then the defendants are not guilty."
John D. Gardner and Worthy & Foster, for appellants.
Wm. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendants were convicted of "living in a state of adultery or fornication." Two exceptions were reserved on the trial,-one to a portion of the charge given by the court ex mero motu, and the other to the refusal of the court to charge the jury as requested by the defendant in writing. There was evidence tending to show the guilt of the defendants as charged in the indictment. The evidence tended to show that one of the defendants was a married man, and the other an unmarried woman. The woman resided alone a portion of the time. The man was seen to leave the house occupied by her, on several occasions, quite early in the morning; and on one occasion, when his wife, in company with a policeman, went to her house about 2 a. m., he was seen running from the house, undressed. The defendants were seen to go off together on several other occasions.
We are of opinion that, construing that portion of the charge of the court given ex mero motu which was excepted to with reference to the evidence, it was not erroneous. The most that can be said against it is that it was calculated to mislead, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whitfield v. State
... ... denying the motion to quash and the motion [85 Fla. 144] in ... arrest of judgment. Bishop on Stat. Crimes (3d Ed.) §§ 697, ... 703; Bishop's Directions and Forms, §§ 81, 152; ... Bishop's New Crim. Proc. § 397; State v. Glaze, ... 9 Ala. 283; Hall v. State, 53 Ala. 463; Walker ... v. State, 104 Ala. 56, 16 So. 7; State v ... Briggs, 68 Iowa, 416, 27 N.W. 358; Cook v ... State, 11 Ga. 53, 56 Am. Dec. 410, note; Spencer v ... State, 14 Okl. Cr. 178, 169 P. 270, L. R. A. 1918F, 592 ... Defendant's ... wife was called as a witness for the state. Before she ... ...
-
Jones v. State
...may be broken off or interrupted from any cause whatever." Brown's Case, 108 Ala. 18, 21, 18 So. 811, and cases there cited; Walker's Case, 104 Ala. 56, 16 So. 7; Wright's 108 Ala. 60, 18 So. 941. The testimony shows that two police officers in the city of Birmingham, while making a "search......
-
McAlpine v. State
... ... hypothesized illicit acts; for, if they lived together in ... adultery for a single day, intending to continue the illicit ... connection, a conviction might have been had ... [23 So. 133.] ... Linton v. State, 88 Ala. 216, 7 So. 261; Walker v ... State, 104 Ala. 56, 16 So. 7. The charges, moreover, ... were misleading, invasive of the province of the jury, and ... faulty generally ... For the ... errors indicated, the judgment of the court below is reversed ... and the cause remanded ... Reversed ... and ... ...
-
Boice v. State
...defendant had several times had sexual intercourse with her, and that the defendant was the father of her illegitimate child. In Walker v. State, 104 Ala. 56, [d] it was held to a question for the jury under the facts and circumstances shown in that case, to say whether or not the state or ......