Wasy v. State, No. 29181
| Docket Nº | No. 29181 |
| Citation | 46 A.L.R.2d 1389, 123 N.E.2d 462, 234 Ind. 52 |
| Case Date | January 05, 1955 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 462
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
[234 Ind. 53]
Page 463
Robert H. Moore, Mario B. Tomsich, Bernard M. Tetek, and Louis S. Feinn, Gary, for appellant.Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen., Owen, S. Boling and Thomas M. Crowdus, Dep. Attys. Gen., for appellee.
EMMERT, Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment on a verdict finding appellant guilty of abortion, for which she was sentenced to the Indiana Women's Prison for a term not less than three nor more than fourteen years, and fined in the sum of $1,000. The assignment of errors contains twenty-five separate items, most of which are improper since they can only be presented by a ruling on a motion for new trial. It will only be [234 Ind. 54] necessary to consider the court's ruling on a motion to quash the affidavit, and the court's ruling refusing to permit the appellant to examine on the voir dire a prospective juror as to religious affiliations or connections.
The affirdavit attempted to charge an offense under § 10-105, Burns' 1942 Replacement, Acts 1905, ch. 169, § 367, p. 584, which is as follows:
'Whoever prescribes or administers to any pregnant woman, or to any woman whom he supposes to be pregnant, any drug, medicine or substance whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of such woman, or, with like intent, uses or suggests, directs or advises, the use of any instrument or means whatever, unless such miscarriage is necessary to preserve her life, shall, on conviction, if the woman miscarries, or dies in consequence thereof, be fined not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), and be imprisoned in the state prison not less than three (3) years nor more than fourteen (14) years.
The affidavit is as follows:
'Affiant, being duly sworn, upon his oath says that on or about the 9th day of October, A.D., 1951, at and in the County of Lake, and State of Indiana, Maria Wasy did then and there unlawfully and feloniously use certain instruments upon and administered certain drugs and substances to Virginia Lefkakis, the names of which said instruments and drugs are unknown to this affiant, the said Virginia Lefkakis being then and there a pregnant woman; with intent then and there and thereby to procure the miscarriage of the said Virginia Lefkakis, in consequence of which she, the said Virginia Lefkakis, did miscarry and the said miscarriage was not then and there necessary to save the life of the said Virginia Lefkakis, then and there being contrary. * * *'
[234 Ind. 55] Appellant contends that the affidavit fails to charge she knew Virginia Lefkakis was pregnant or that said drugs or substances or certain instruments did cause a miscarriage. The statute defining the offense does require that the accused believe the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cordero v. United States, No. 80-594.
...be conducted on retrial" (citations omitted)). 6. People v. Murawski, 2 Ill.2d 143, 146, 117 N.E.2d 88, 90 (1954); Wasy v. Indiana, 234 Ind. 52, 55, 123 N.E.2d 462, 464 (1955) (religious views on abortion); State v. Barnett, 251 Or. 234, 236, 445 P.2d 124, 125 (1958) (same). 7. Kuzniak......
-
Swain v. State of Alabama, No. 64
...347 (1855); Fendrick v. State, 39 Tex.Crim. 147, 45 S.W. 589 (1898); State v. Carson, 131 S.C. 42, 126 S.E. 757 (1925); Wasy v. State, 234 Ind. 52, 123 N.E.2d 462, 46 A.L.R.2d 1389 (1955); People v. Roxborough, 307 Mich. 575, 12 N.W.2d 466 (1943), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 749, 65 S.Ct. 80, 89......
-
Kranda v. Houser-Norborg Medical Corp., HOUSER-NORBORG
...has heard the examination by his opponent and has had an opportunity to conduct his own examination. As was noted in Wasy v. State, (1955) 234 Ind. 52, 123 Page 1039 N.E.2d 462, a party then has at hand all the requisite information for making an intelligent choice of whether to challenge t......
-
Anderson v. State, No. 2--875A202
...avail (an accused person) nothing unless her counsel is permitted to make an intelligent exercise of the right.' Wasy v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 52, 56, 123 N.E.2d 462, 464, 46 A.L.R.2d 1389. That was a case in which an abortion conviction was reversed because the trial court refused to perm......
-
Cordero v. United States, No. 80-594.
...be conducted on retrial" (citations omitted)). 6. People v. Murawski, 2 Ill.2d 143, 146, 117 N.E.2d 88, 90 (1954); Wasy v. Indiana, 234 Ind. 52, 55, 123 N.E.2d 462, 464 (1955) (religious views on abortion); State v. Barnett, 251 Or. 234, 236, 445 P.2d 124, 125 (1958) (same). 7. Kuzniak......
-
Swain v. State of Alabama, No. 64
...347 (1855); Fendrick v. State, 39 Tex.Crim. 147, 45 S.W. 589 (1898); State v. Carson, 131 S.C. 42, 126 S.E. 757 (1925); Wasy v. State, 234 Ind. 52, 123 N.E.2d 462, 46 A.L.R.2d 1389 (1955); People v. Roxborough, 307 Mich. 575, 12 N.W.2d 466 (1943), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 749, 65 S.Ct. 80, 89......
-
Kranda v. Houser-Norborg Medical Corp., HOUSER-NORBORG
...has heard the examination by his opponent and has had an opportunity to conduct his own examination. As was noted in Wasy v. State, (1955) 234 Ind. 52, 123 Page 1039 N.E.2d 462, a party then has at hand all the requisite information for making an intelligent choice of whether to challenge t......
-
Anderson v. State, No. 2--875A202
...avail (an accused person) nothing unless her counsel is permitted to make an intelligent exercise of the right.' Wasy v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 52, 56, 123 N.E.2d 462, 464, 46 A.L.R.2d 1389. That was a case in which an abortion conviction was reversed because the trial court refused to perm......