Skip to main content

State v. Griffin

Citations

  • 43 Wash. 591
  • 86 P. 951
  • 1906 Wash. LEXIS 753

Syllabus

<p>Rape — Evidence—Complaints Made. In a prosecution for rape it is error to permit the witnesses to whom the prosecutrix had made complaint to state the name of the person whom she claimed to have committed the offense.</p> <p>Same — Complaints—Delay in Making. While ordinarily complaints made by the prosecutrix for an alleged rape are to be submitted to the jury under proper instructions, they should be excluded where no complaint was made for a year and a half after the defendant first took liberties with her person, and eight months after his first felonious assault, and six months after the consummated offense, where her age and surroundings furnished no sufficient excuse for the delay; since in such case the evidence of complaints ceases to be corroborating.</p> <p>Same — Instructions. In such a case, it is error to submit to the jury the question whether the complaints were seasonably made.</p> <p>Same — Trial—Instructions. In a prosecution for rape upon one under the age of consent, claimed to have been made by force and notwithstanding resistance and outcry, it is error to refuse to instruct that the jury should take into consideration whether there was injury to the person or clothing, whether complaint was seasonably made, whether persons in the house could have heard outcry, if any were made, and whether the prosecutrix did make outcry in resisting assault.</p> <p>Same — Issues and Proof — Question eoe Juey. In a prosecution for rape it was error to withdraw from the jury the theory of the defense that the prosecution was instigated to shield another party, where there was evidence that she was surprised in a compromising position with another man shortly before the charge was preferred against the defendant.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Evidence—Fabrication oe Evidence. An attempt to obtain a flash-light photograph of the defendant in a compromising position with a female under the age of consent, whom it was alleged he had assaulted and raped, would not be a

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “In the nature of things there must be some limit of time beyond which such complaints cease to corroborate”
  • complaint made six months after assault was not sufficiently timely to be admissible under the hue and cry doctrine
  • trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding statements admissible under fact-of-complaint doctrine where child was living with abuser and abuse was still ongoing, even though reports were made outside charging period
  • complaint six months after assault was not sufficiently timely

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rudkin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.