Chapman v. State

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Chapman v. State

1942 OK 46, 121 P.2d 991, 190 Okla. 202, 1942 Okla. LEXIS 35

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 3, 1942

DocketNo. 30040.

StatusPublished

This text of 1942 OK 46 (Chapman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chapman v. State, 1942 OK 46, 121 P.2d 991, 190 Okla. 202, 1942 Okla. LEXIS 35 (Okla. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On the 12th day of March, 1940, the jury returned a verdict for the State of Oklahoma in favor of the prosecutrix and against Clay Chapman in a bastardy proceeding, and the court entered judgment thereon. Defendant has appealed, and the sole issue presented is the error of the trial court in denying a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.

The defendant admitted acts of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on *203 March 6th and March 8th before twins were born on October 21, 1939.

The evidence is not presented except in narration on stipulation of the parties. So far as the record discloses, no exceptions were saved to any of the evidence offered, the instructions of the court, or any of the proceedings prior to the filing of the motion for new trial. The defendant offered the affidavit of Albert Ellis, in which it is stated that the said Albert Ellis had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on March 11, 1939. We have examined the motion for new trial, the affidavit in support thereof, and the record in connection therewith, and are of the opinion that the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial. Wilson v. State, 73 Okla. 227, 175 P. 829; Bond v. State, 131 Okla. 104, 267 P. 850; Magnolia Pet. Co. v. McDonald, 168 Okla. 255, 32 P. 2d 909; Reviere v. Payne, 166 Okla. 150, 26 P. 2d 734; Holly v. Holly, 174 Okla. 626, 51 P. 2d 527; Abrams v. Neal, 182 Okla. 560, 78 P. 2d 1049; Belford v. Allen, 183 Okla. 256, 80 P. 2d 671.

There is a narration of the testimony of the physician who attended the pros-ecutrix at the birth of the twins. He stated that from the history given by the prosecutrix her last menstrual period commenced March 15, 1939, and that the twins were prematurely born, approximately seven and one - half months after conception.

Considering this testimony and all the other facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that a new trial would probably not result in a change in the verdict. Vickers v. Philip Carey Co., 49 Okla. 231, 151 P. 1023, L.R.A. 1916C, 1155.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

WELCH, C. J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. CORN, V. C. J., and GIBSON, J., absent.

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

PER CURIAM.

On the 12th day of March, 1940, the jury returned a verdict for the State of Oklahoma in favor of the prosecutrix and against Clay Chapman in a bastardy proceeding, and the court entered judgment thereon. Defendant has appealed, and the sole issue presented is the error of the trial court in denying a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence.

The defendant admitted acts of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on *203 March 6th and March 8th before twins were born on October 21, 1939.

The evidence is not presented except in narration on stipulation of the parties. So far as the record discloses, no exceptions were saved to any of the evidence offered, the instructions of the court, or any of the proceedings prior to the filing of the motion for new trial. The defendant offered the affidavit of Albert Ellis, in which it is stated that the said Albert Ellis had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on March 11, 1939. We have examined the motion for new trial, the affidavit in support thereof, and the record in connection therewith, and are of the opinion that the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial. Wilson v. State, 73 Okla. 227, 175 P. 829; Bond v. State, 131 Okla. 104, 267 P. 850; Magnolia Pet. Co. v. McDonald, 168 Okla. 255, 32 P. 2d 909; Reviere v. Payne, 166 Okla. 150, 26 P. 2d 734; Holly v. Holly, 174 Okla. 626, 51 P. 2d 527; Abrams v. Neal, 182 Okla. 560, 78 P. 2d 1049; Belford v. Allen, 183 Okla. 256, 80 P. 2d 671.

There is a narration of the testimony of the physician who attended the pros-ecutrix at the birth of the twins. He stated that from the history given by the prosecutrix her last menstrual period commenced March 15, 1939, and that the twins were prematurely born, approximately seven and one - half months after conception.

Considering this testimony and all the other facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that a new trial would probably not result in a change in the verdict. Vickers v. Philip Carey Co., 49 Okla. 231, 151 P. 1023, L.R.A. 1916C, 1155.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

WELCH, C. J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. CORN, V. C. J., and GIBSON, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1942 OK 46, 121 P.2d 991, 190 Okla. 202, 1942 Okla. LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-state-okla-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack