People v. Patterson
Citations
- 102 Cal. 239
- 36 P. 436
- 1894 Cal. LEXIS 626
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Incest—Indictment Against One Party.—The fact that the crime of incest may be a joint offense does not preclude an indictment or information against one of the parties, and his trial and conviction for the offense.</p> <p>Id.—Pleading—Following Language of Statute.—In this state an indictment or information is sufficient, if the language of the statute is substantially followed, and the facts constituting the offense are stated in such a manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Distinct Offense.—While, as a general rule, testimony is not admissible which tends to prove a distinct and different offense to that for which the defendant is on trial, yet in cases where incest or adultery is charged, prior acts of sexual intercourse between the parties may be proven.</p>
Judges: Belcher
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. O'DonnellOregon Supreme Court· 1900-07-30· cited 58×
- Sykes v. StateTennessee Supreme Court· 1903-12-15· cited 42×
- State v. WillsonOregon Supreme Court· 1925-02-17· cited 32×
- State v. WoodWashington Supreme Court· 1903-12-02· cited 17×
- State v. MoreSupreme Court of Iowa· 1901-12-20· cited 16×
- People v. BowlesCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1960-02-24· cited 8×
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.