State v. Morden

Citations

• 87 Wash. 465
• 151 P. 832
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 922

Syllabus

<p>Rape—Corroboration of Prosecutrix — Necessity —■ Statutes— Repeal. Corroboration of the prosecutrix in a trial for rape not being necessary at common law to sustain a conviction, it is not necessary in this state, since the repeal of Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2443, by Laws of 1913, p. 298, restoring the law to its former status.</p> <p>Rape—Evidence—Time and Place—Admissibility. In a prosecution for rape alleged to have been committed on defendant’s premises on a certain day on which the prosecutrix was working for the defendant, a statement of account for the balance due her, showing that the prosecutrix had charged defendant for work on that day, and'that he had paid for the same, is competent upon the issue raised by the defendant’s claim that the prosecutrix was not working for him or upon the premises on the day in question.</p> <p>Criminal Law—Evidence—Best and Secondary—Documents— Notice to Produce. Where a written statement of account material to an issue in a criminal case is in the possession of the accused, the state may introduce secondary evidence of its contents without first demanding of the accused that he produce the original; since an accused cannot he compelled to furnish evidence against himself.</p> <p>Witnesses—Privilege of Accused—Furnishing Evidence Against Self. The state and Federal constitutions guaranteeing that no person shall be compelled in a criminal case to give evidence against himself are not impinged by a question on cross-examination of the accused, asking if he had in his possession a certain statement of account material to an issue, and upon his replying that he did not know whether he or his attorney had it, the attorney answered that he did not; since no demand upon the accused to produce the statement was made or implied.</p> <p>Witnesses—Cross-Examination oe Accused—Rape. Where, in a prosecution for rape, the defendant testified that he had never made such statements as the prosecutrix had attributed to him, either to her “or