Bradburn v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Bradburn v. State

71 N.E. 133, 162 Ind. 689, 1904 Ind. LEXIS 99

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedMay 24, 1904

DocketNo. 20,271

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 71 N.E. 133 (Bradburn v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bradburn v. State, 71 N.E. 133, 162 Ind. 689, 1904 Ind. LEXIS 99 (Ind. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

Gillett, J.

Appellant was charged with the commission of the crime of rape upon the person of a female child under the age of fourteen years.

The first question presented is whether there was sufficient proof of penetration. Section 1875 Burns 1901 provides : “In prosecutions for the offense of rape, proof of penetration shall be sufficient evidence of the commission of the offense.”. We do not deem it necessary to exhibit the evidence in detail. There was an indefinite question asked the prosecuting witness as to the act of appellant with reference to the matter of penetration. From her answer to such question, coupled with her testimony as to the other acts of appellant, and as to his declaration as to his purpose, we think that it was competent for the court, to whom the cause was submitted, to find that there was penetration. In fact, such inference, in view of the an[690]*690swer referred to, was the only one which would reasonably comport with the details of appellant’s conduct toward her as testified to by said witness. There is a natural tendency upon the part of both counsel and witness, prompted by a sense of the fundamental proprieties of the occasion, to deal with a matter of this kind in other than unambiguous terms. Sitting here, one remove from the trial, we cannot say that the judge who tried the cause was not at liberty to draw an inference which as a man he could hardly fail to adopt as to the meaning which the witness’ words were intended to convey.

Finally, it is objected that no testimony was introduced upon the trial tending to prove that appellant was over thirty years of age. There is no merit in this objection. Boone v. State, 160 Ind. 678; Colip v. State, 153 Ind. 584, 74 Am. St. 322.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gillett, J.

Appellant was charged with the commission of the crime of rape upon the person of a female child under the age of fourteen years.

The first question presented is whether there was sufficient proof of penetration. Section 1875 Burns 1901 provides : “In prosecutions for the offense of rape, proof of penetration shall be sufficient evidence of the commission of the offense.”. We do not deem it necessary to exhibit the evidence in detail. There was an indefinite question asked the prosecuting witness as to the act of appellant with reference to the matter of penetration. From her answer to such question, coupled with her testimony as to the other acts of appellant, and as to his declaration as to his purpose, we think that it was competent for the court, to whom the cause was submitted, to find that there was penetration. In fact, such inference, in view of the an[690]*690swer referred to, was the only one which would reasonably comport with the details of appellant’s conduct toward her as testified to by said witness. There is a natural tendency upon the part of both counsel and witness, prompted by a sense of the fundamental proprieties of the occasion, to deal with a matter of this kind in other than unambiguous terms. Sitting here, one remove from the trial, we cannot say that the judge who tried the cause was not at liberty to draw an inference which as a man he could hardly fail to adopt as to the meaning which the witness’ words were intended to convey.

Finally, it is objected that no testimony was introduced upon the trial tending to prove that appellant was over thirty years of age. There is no merit in this objection. Boone v. State, 160 Ind. 678; Colip v. State, 153 Ind. 584, 74 Am. St. 322.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 N.E. 133, 162 Ind. 689, 1904 Ind. LEXIS 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradburn-v-state-ind-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack