State v. Armstrong
Citations
- 87 Wash. 275
- 151 P. 775
- 1915 Wash. LEXIS 900
Syllabus
<p>Rape—Carnal Knowledge of Child—Pregnancy—Materiality. Upon the trial of a charge of carnal knowledge of a child under the age of fifteen years, it is not error to refuse to appoint physicians to make a physical examination to determine whether the prosecutrix was pregnant, and, if so, whether conception took place after the time of the alleged offense; since it could not disprove the charge.</p> <p>Appeal—Record—Statement op Pacts—Affidavits. Affidavits in support of a motion for a new trial cannot be considered on appeal unless made a part of the record by bill of exceptions or statement of facts.</p>
Judges: Main
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Hale v. City Cab, Carriage & Transfer Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1912-01-04· cited 16×
- Dyke v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court· 1914-12-01· cited 12×
- Stern v. City of SpokaneWashington Supreme Court· 1913-04-18· cited 11×
- State v. StappWashington Supreme Court· 1911-10-28· cited 9×
- State v. MoranWashington Supreme Court· 1912-01-15· cited 6×
- Norton v. Pacific Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1914-05-16· cited 6×
- Gazzam v. ZimmerWashington Supreme Court· 1912-04-03· cited 5×
- Ritter v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1914-11-17· cited 5×
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.