State v. Clifford

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State v. Clifford

41 A.2d 266, 132 N.J.L. 529, 1945 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 151

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedFebruary 27, 1945

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 41 A.2d 266 (State v. Clifford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Clifford, 41 A.2d 266, 132 N.J.L. 529, 1945 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 151 (N.J. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Peb Cubiam.

The plaintiff in error, electing to be tried without a jury, was convicted in the Passaic County Court of Special Sessions. The indictment charged her with having willfully, *530 maliciously and without lawful justification used an instrument on Mrs. Genesta Wild, a woman then pregnant with child, with intent to procure a miscarriage, in violation of our statute, B. 8. 2:105-1.

The only point made on this appeal on which we are asked to reverse the conviction is that the verdict found by the judge was against the weight of the evidence. The argument rests solely on the proposition that the state had not proved that Mrs. Wild was in fact pregnant. The state produced proof of physical conditions, reactions and functional disturbances which, as a matter of common knowledge, denote probable pregnancy, the same symptoms indeed which this complaining witness testified she experienced prior to the time her other children were born. Such testimony was sufficient proof to justify the court in concluding that the pregnancy of this woman was established. Compare State v. Loomis, 90 N. J. L. 216.

There is no merit whatever in the argument of the plaintiff in error and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Peb Cubiam.

The plaintiff in error, electing to be tried without a jury, was convicted in the Passaic County Court of Special Sessions. The indictment charged her with having willfully, *530 maliciously and without lawful justification used an instrument on Mrs. Genesta Wild, a woman then pregnant with child, with intent to procure a miscarriage, in violation of our statute, B. 8. 2:105-1.

The only point made on this appeal on which we are asked to reverse the conviction is that the verdict found by the judge was against the weight of the evidence. The argument rests solely on the proposition that the state had not proved that Mrs. Wild was in fact pregnant. The state produced proof of physical conditions, reactions and functional disturbances which, as a matter of common knowledge, denote probable pregnancy, the same symptoms indeed which this complaining witness testified she experienced prior to the time her other children were born. Such testimony was sufficient proof to justify the court in concluding that the pregnancy of this woman was established. Compare State v. Loomis, 90 N. J. L. 216.

There is no merit whatever in the argument of the plaintiff in error and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.2d 266, 132 N.J.L. 529, 1945 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-clifford-nj-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack