Kolb v. State
Citations
- 129 Miss. 834
- 93 So. 358
Syllabus
<p>1. Criminal Law. Error to admit acts of sexual intercourse subsequent to first act which completes offense of statutory raye; acts of sexual intercourse prior to act constituting statutory rape admissible.</p> <p>Under chapter 171, Laws 1914, section 1 (Hemingway’s Code, section 1093), making it a felony for any male person to carnally know a female person of previous chaste character younger than himself, over twelve and under eighteen years of age, the offense is complete . with the first act of sexual intercourse, and it is error to prove subsequent acts of sexual intercourse between the accused and the female. The relations previous to such act may be admissible, but subsequent acts should be excluded.</p> <p>2. Bare. General reputation of prosecutrix for chastity prior to act of accused admissible in statutory rape.</p> <p>In a trial for the violation of the Age of Consent Law (chapter 171, section 1, Laws 1914; Hemingway’s Code, section 1093), previous chaste character of the prosecutrix is material, and evidence of her general reputation as to chastity is admissible to prove or disprove her chastity, and it is reversible error to exclude such evidence, but such general reputation must be confined to time anterior to the act of defendant. ,</p> <p>3.Witnesses. Prosecutrix testifying that accused violated her chastity may be impeached by shelving contrary statements.</p> <p>Where a prosecutrix in a case for violating tlie Age of Consent Law (section 1, chapter 171, Laws 1914; Hemingway’s Code, section 1093) testifies for the state that the defendant was guilty of violating said law, and that he was the first person to violate her chastity, she may be impeached by showing statement made to other persons that another than the defendant is the guilty one, or that she had sexual intercourse with another prior to the time fixed in her tesimony that defendant violated her chastity.</p> <p>4. Rape. Evidence of size and appearance of prosecutrix in given year admiss
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating the relation of the male and female prior to the alleged act may be shown in evidence for the purpose of showing opportunity and otherwise corroborating the testimony of guilt at the time of the act
- stating the relation of the male and female prior to the alleged act may be shown in evidence for the purpose of showing opportunity and otherwise corroborating the testimony of guilt at the time of the act
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Ethridge
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Brooks v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1971-01-04· cited 50×
- Miley v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2006-08-10· cited 21×
- State v. MayMississippi Supreme Court· 1950-04-10· cited 6×
- Southern Beverage Co. v. BarbarinMississippi Supreme Court· 1954-01-04· cited 6×
- Samuel Lee Miley v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court· 2005-06-09
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. LockerbySupreme Court of Minnesota· 1892-07-01· cited 11×
- Hatton v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1908-03-15· cited 11×
- Carroll v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1897-03-15· cited 4×
- Carter v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1911-03-15· cited 4×
- Hatton v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1909-03-15· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.