People v. Bates

2 Park. Cr. 27
Court Of Oyer And Terminer New York·Decided August 22, 1823·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Walworth, Circuit Judge.

The testimony of the person injured is not absolutely necessary in a case of this kind; which differs materially from the case of an actual rape. This is only a question of intention. That question the jury must determine from the cireumstahces of the case. And I can hardly imagine how they could he made stronger, if the woman was herself a witness. If she could explain these circumstances so as to make them consistent with the innocence of the prisoner, it was his duty to procure her attendance at the trial.

The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment, in the state prison.

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

People v. Bates, 2 Park. Cr. 27 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1823).

2 Park. Cr. 27 (People v. Bates) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Harris
282 A.D. 156 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1953)
The People v. . Bransby
32 N.Y. 525 (New York Court of Appeals, 1865)