Wille v. State ex rel. Kessler
| Decision Date | 08 February 1927 |
| Parties | WILLE v. STATE EX REL. KESSLER. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Civil Court, Milwaukee County; A. J. Hedding, Judge.
Frank Wille was convicted of being the father of an illegitimate child born to Barbara Kessler, and he brings error. Affirmed.--[By Editorial Staff.]
Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called the defendant, was convicted of being the father of an illegitimate child born to Barbara Kessler, an unmarried female 29 years old. To test the validity of his conviction, he sued out a writ of error.Sydney C. Charney, of Milwaukee, for plaintiff in error.
John W. Reynolds, Atty. Gen., and Eugene Wengert, Dist. Atty., and C. Stanley Perry, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Milwaukee, for defendant in error.
[1] Error is alleged because the evidence does not sustain the conviction. It appears, without dispute, that the defendant had known Miss Kessler for a period of about seven years and she testified that she had had sexual relations with him during most of that time; that he kept company with her twice a week during that time; that he sometimes stayed over night at her home; and that she had the last sexual intercourse with him on New Year's Day, 1925; that she told him she was in the family way; and that he took her to a doctor. She also testified that she had never had sexual intercourse with any other man. The child was full term and was born alive October 4, 1925. The defendant admitted keeping company with Miss Kessler; that he took her to a doctor, but denied that he had any sexual intercourse with her on New Year's Day or Eve. He declined to testify whether he had ever had sexual intercourse with her on the ground that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him. He admitted he had kissed her. This is the substance of the testimony. It presented a jury issue, and the verdict cannot be set aside on the ground of lack of evidence to convict. The jury evidently believed Miss Kessler, and we see no reason why they should not do so.
[2] Error is assigned on this instruction:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Schlehlein v. Duris, 204
...else is sufficient to support a verdict that the defendant is the father of her child, if the jury believed it. Wille v. State ex rel. Kessler, 192 Wis. 224, 212 N.W. 260; State v. Willing, 259 Wis. 395, 48 N.W.2d 236.'' ' State ex rel. Sarnowski v. Fox (1963), 19 Wis.2d 68, 70, 119 N.W.2d ......
-
State ex rel. Stollberg v. Crittenden
...else is sufficient to support a verdict that the defendant is the father of her child, if the jury believed it. Wille v. State ex rel. Kessler, 192 Wis. 224, 212 N.W. 260; State v. Willing, 259 Wis. 395, 48 N.W.2d 236.' (Emphasis We conclude that there was credible evidence which reasonable......
-
Nelson v. State
...515, 196 N. W. 825;Riley v. State, 187 Wis. 156, 203 N. W. 767, 768;Cobb v. State, 191 Wis. 652, 211 N. W. 785;Wille v. State ex rel. Kessler, 192 Wis. 224, 212 N. W. 260. While this court has uniformly held such an instruction to be erroneous it has not always considered such instruction p......
-
State ex rel. Sarnowski v. Fox
...else is sufficient to support a verdict that the defendant is the father of her child, if the jury believed it. Willie v. State ex rel. Kessler, 192 Wis. 224, 212 N.W. 260; State v. Willing, 259 Wis. 395, 48 N.W.2d Defendant-appellant raises these issues on this appeal: 1. Whether certain i......