Woolbright v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Woolbright v. State

169 N.E. 883, 90 Ind. App. 704, 1930 Ind. App. LEXIS 25

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 31, 1930

DocketNo. 13,717.

StatusPublished

This text of 169 N.E. 883 (Woolbright v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Woolbright v. State, 169 N.E. 883, 90 Ind. App. 704, 1930 Ind. App. LEXIS 25 (Ind. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Remy, C. J.

Appellant was charged by affidavit with contributing to the neglect of her own minor children, in violation of §4 of the act of 1907 (Acts 1907 p. 59, §1701 Burns 1926). Trial resulted in a conviction, and this appeal followed. The only question properly saved and presented is the sufficiency of the evidence; in considering which, it is only the evidence favorable to the state which will be considered. Gmil v. State (1929), 89 Ind. App. 19, 165 N. E. 695.

It appears from the evidence that appellant and her husband are the parents of three minor children, the youngest being of the age of 10 years; that, during the last five years, appellant has lived in the city of Indianapolis with her husband and children, except on five different occasions when she deserted her home and family for the purpose of unlawful association with men other than her husband, the last of these having taken place shortly before the commencement of this prosecution; that, on one of these occasions, she went with a man to Ohio, where they were each charged and convicted of the crime of adultery; that in January, 1929, before the commencement of this prosecution, she left her children and home, and, under an assumed name, lived for a short time in adultery with a man who gave his name as Smith; and that, on the occasions when appellant left her home, she left no one in care of her children. It further appears that appellant is in the habit of drinking intoxicating liquors to excess.

The evidence is sufficient.

Affirmed.

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

Remy, C. J.

Appellant was charged by affidavit with contributing to the neglect of her own minor children, in violation of §4 of the act of 1907 (Acts 1907 p. 59, §1701 Burns 1926). Trial resulted in a conviction, and this appeal followed. The only question properly saved and presented is the sufficiency of the evidence; in considering which, it is only the evidence favorable to the state which will be considered. Gmil v. State (1929), 89 Ind. App. 19, 165 N. E. 695.

It appears from the evidence that appellant and her husband are the parents of three minor children, the youngest being of the age of 10 years; that, during the last five years, appellant has lived in the city of Indianapolis with her husband and children, except on five different occasions when she deserted her home and family for the purpose of unlawful association with men other than her husband, the last of these having taken place shortly before the commencement of this prosecution; that, on one of these occasions, she went with a man to Ohio, where they were each charged and convicted of the crime of adultery; that in January, 1929, before the commencement of this prosecution, she left her children and home, and, under an assumed name, lived for a short time in adultery with a man who gave his name as Smith; and that, on the occasions when appellant left her home, she left no one in care of her children. It further appears that appellant is in the habit of drinking intoxicating liquors to excess.

The evidence is sufficient.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 N.E. 883, 90 Ind. App. 704, 1930 Ind. App. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woolbright-v-state-indctapp-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack