State v. Hunter
Citations
- 18 Wash. 670
- 52 P. 247
- 1898 Wash. LEXIS 607
Syllabus
<p>RAPE — EVIDENCE—DEPOSITIONS — VIEW OF PREMISES—INTENT TO COMMIT RAPE — CONSENT—INSTRUCTIONS—NEW TRIAL — MISCONDUCT OF JURY—SURPRISE — NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE.</p> <p>In a prosecution for assault with intent to commit rape upon a female child under the age of twelve years, the mother of the prosecutrix may properly testify to the condition of the child’s clothing, and as to what she found upon it, shortly after the alleged assault.</p> <p>In such a case, the testimony of the mother as to complaints made by the prosecutrix to her immediately or within an hour after the commission of the alleged injury is admissible, though such evidence should be restricted to the mere fact of complaint, without admitting any of the particulars of the complaint in evidence.</p> <p>The admission in evidence of a plan of the scene of an alleged crime, which does not purport to accurately describe the premises, is not error when it is received only for the purpose of enabling a witness to illustrate his testimony, and the court by a special instruction limits the jury’s consideration of it to that purpose alone.</p> <p>The admission in evidence, over objection, of.the testimony of a witness whose name is incorrectly indorsed on the information is not error, when no application is made by the defendant for continuance on the ground that the name of the witness does not appear upon the information.</p> <p>The refusal of the court to direct a view of the premises by the jury is not error, when there is no showing of an abuse of the discretion given the trial judge in such matters by the provisions of Code Proc., § 1312 (Bal. Code, § 6948).</p> <p>The' testimony of witnesses that they had heard a person, .who at the time of trial was absent from the state, say that he had made certain footprints found near the scene of an assault, and which the state were attempting to prove were made by the accused, is inadmissible as hearsay.</p> <p>The consent of the female does not constitute a defe
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[W]e think the better rule is to restrict the evidence to the fact of complaint, and that anything beyond that is hearsay of the most dangerous character.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gordon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. GoebelWashington Supreme Court· 1952-01-24· cited 128×
- State v. FergusonWashington Supreme Court· 1983-07-28· cited 101×
- State v. ClaflinCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1984-11-06· cited 80×
- State v. WhiteWashington Supreme Court· 1968-08-29· cited 72×
- State v. GayWashington Supreme Court· 1914-12-07· cited 50×
- State v. FetterlyWashington Supreme Court· 1903-12-29· cited 49×
- State v. O'ClairSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1972-06-14· cited 48×
- State v. GriffinWashington Supreme Court· 1906-09-08· cited 38×
- State v. PughWashington Supreme Court· 2009-12-31· cited 29×
- State v. LintonWashington Supreme Court· 1950-04-03· cited 26×
- State v. FillpotWashington Supreme Court· 1908-12-18· cited 24×
- State v. StewartWashington Supreme Court· 1909-03-03· cited 14×
- State v. WhitmanOregon Supreme Court· 1914-09-22· cited 12×
- State v. MartinezWashington Supreme Court· 2020-11-19· cited 11×
- State v. AldrickWashington Supreme Court· 1917-08-13· cited 11×
- Alexander v. StateNevada Supreme Court· 1968-12-31· cited 6×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 1898-05-26· cited 1×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. De WolfSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1830-06-15· cited 54×
- Commonwealth v. RoosnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1886-11-22· cited 49×
- Pleasant v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1855-01-15· cited 43×
- Thompson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1871-11-15· cited 28×
- State v. PickettNevada Supreme Court· 1876-07-15· cited 22×
- Murphy v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1889-09-24· cited 22×
- Fizell v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court· 1870-01-15· cited 18×
- Scott v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama· 1872-06-15· cited 17×
- Stephens v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1886-06-25· cited 15×
- State v. HalbertWashington Supreme Court· 1896-03-21· cited 10×
- State v. DillonWashington Supreme Court· 1896-05-25· 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.