Territory of Arizona v. Richmond

Arizona Supreme Court

Territory of Arizona v. Richmond

10 P. 368, 2 Ariz. 68, 1886 Ariz. LEXIS 2

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 18, 1886

DocketCrim. No. 37

StatusPublished

This text of 10 P. 368 (Territory of Arizona v. Richmond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Territory of Arizona v. Richmond, 10 P. 368, 2 Ariz. 68, 1886 Ariz. LEXIS 2 (Ark. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

TMs was au indictment charging Jerry Richmond with the crime of rape upon the person of Minnie [69]*69Eichler. The cause was tried in Graham county, and he was found guilty, and sentenced to a term of five years in the territorial prison. We have examined the evidence in the case, and are of the opinion that the evidence sustains the conviction. It is urged that the court erred in not permitting evidence to go to the jury on behalf of defendant that the house in which she lived was a house of bad reputé for chastity. The record shows that she was 13 years old; that she lived with her mother; and that no other person occupied the house-with them. In such case, the general reputation of the house was not material. No other error is pointed out.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

TMs was au indictment charging Jerry Richmond with the crime of rape upon the person of Minnie [69]*69Eichler. The cause was tried in Graham county, and he was found guilty, and sentenced to a term of five years in the territorial prison. We have examined the evidence in the case, and are of the opinion that the evidence sustains the conviction. It is urged that the court erred in not permitting evidence to go to the jury on behalf of defendant that the house in which she lived was a house of bad reputé for chastity. The record shows that she was 13 years old; that she lived with her mother; and that no other person occupied the house-with them. In such case, the general reputation of the house was not material. No other error is pointed out.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 P. 368, 2 Ariz. 68, 1886 Ariz. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/territory-of-arizona-v-richmond-ariz-1886.