Wright v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Wright v. State

5 Blackf. 358, 1840 Ind. LEXIS 65

Indiana Supreme Court·Decided July 2, 1840·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Sullivan, J.

The defendant was indicted for living in open and notorious adultery with a certain woman, &c. [359] Plea, not guilty. On the trial, the ju^Bpund the defendant guilty. Motion for a new trial overruHl, and judgment on the verdict.

J. Pitcher, for the plaintiff. W. J. Peaslee, for the state.

The testimony did not prove a “living together” as is required by the statute, but simply, if it proved any thing, an occasional illicit intercourse between the defendant and the woman named in the -indictment. The offence consists in an open and notorious cohabitation, and unless it be of that character, it is not indictable.'

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed, and the verdict set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

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

Sullivan, J.

The defendant was indicted for living in open and notorious adultery with a certain woman, &c. [359] Plea, not guilty. On the trial, the ju^Bpund the defendant guilty. Motion for a new trial overruHl, and judgment on the verdict.

J. Pitcher, for the plaintiff. W. J. Peaslee, for the state.

The testimony did not prove a “living together” as is required by the statute, but simply, if it proved any thing, an occasional illicit intercourse between the defendant and the woman named in the -indictment. The offence consists in an open and notorious cohabitation, and unless it be of that character, it is not indictable.'

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed, and the verdict set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

Wright v. State, 5 Blackf. 358, 1840 Ind. LEXIS 65 (Ind. 1840).

Pincite

5 Blackf. 358 (Wright v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related