State v. Conkright

12 N.W. 283, 58 Iowa 338
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided April 22, 1882·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Rothrock, J.

1. CRIMINAL law : seduction : indictment. The case is submitted upon a transcript without abstract or argument for appellant. It appears that ^ie defendant has been twice tried, and at each trial was found guilty. The first verdict was set aside and a new trial awarded. The transcript does not contain the evidence offered on the trial. The indictment charges that the defendant “did unlawfully and feloniously seduce, debauch and carnally know one Caroline Jenkins.” There was a demurrer to the indictment upon the ground that no facts are stated therein constituting the crime of seduction. The demurrer was overruled. The ruling was correct. See State v. Curran, 51 Iowa, 112.

We have examined the whole record, including the instructions given by the court to the jury, and have to say that we discover no error therein.

Affirmed.

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

State v. Conkright, 12 N.W. 283, 58 Iowa 338 (iowa 1882).

12 N.W. 283 (State v. Conkright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Caldwell v. State
83 S.W. 929 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1904)
State v. Johnson
87 N.W. 279 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1901)
State v. Porter
75 N.W. 519 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1898)
State v. Whalen
68 N.W. 554 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1896)