State v. Nelson
Citations
- 39 Wash. 221
- 81 P. 721
- 1905 Wash. LEXIS 847
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Adultery—Information—Erroneous Designation of Offense—Living in a State of Adultery. An information plainly charging the offense of living in a state of adultery, is not defective on account of a recitation erroneously designating the offense as the crime of adultery, which is not punishable under our statutes.</p> <p>Same—Certainty. An information is not uncertain in that it may charge the offenses of adultery, living in a state of adultery, cohabitation, or lewdness, when the intent to charge the offense of living in a state of adultery is plain to a person of common understanding.</p> <p>Same. Such an information is not bad for duplicity.</p> <p>Same—Parties Defendant. In a prosecution for living in a state of adultery, it is not necessary to join the alleged paramour as a defendant.</p> <p>Same—Certainty as to Time. An information for living in a state of adultery, charging the commission of the crime between certain dates, is not uncertain as to time.</p> <p>Criminal Law—Orders-—Recitals—Copy of Information. An order of arraignment reciting the delivery of a copy of the information cannot be contradicted by ex parte affidavits.</p> <p>Same—Adultery—Evidence of Previous Acts. In a prosecution for living in a state of adultery, the conduct of the parties previous to the date charged may be shown.</p> <p>Same—Marriage of Paramour—Harmless Error. In a prosecution for living in a state of adultery, the state has a right to prove the marriage of the alleged paramour and the absence of her husband, as part of the surrounding circumstances; and if the marriage was immaterial, it was not prejudicial.</p> <p>Same — Adultery of Paramour — Birth of Child — Harmless Error. In a prosecution for living in a state of adultery with a married woman, it is competent for the state to prove that she gave birth to a child more than twenty months after she had seen or cohabited with her husband, as one step toward proving the ultimate fact of adultery with the accused
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- testimony of a witness present at wedding ceremony is sufficient evidence of marriage
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Crow, Dunbar, Fullerton, Hadley, Hoot, Mount, Rudkin, Tbe
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Wolfle v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1934-01-08· cited 272×
- State v. WilkinsOregon Supreme Court· 1914-06-23· cited 31×
- McKie v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1927-11-19· cited 18×
- De Wolf v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1952-05-28· cited 16×
- Wirthlin v. Mutual Life Ins. Co.Tenth Circuit· 1932-02-01· cited 14×
- State v. SnyderWashington Supreme Court· 1915-03-22· cited 14×
- Weatherall v. WeatherallWashington Supreme Court· 1909-12-16· cited 13×
- State v. WakefieldOregon Supreme Court· 1924-07-22· cited 11×
- DeWolf v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma· 1952-05-28· cited 10×
- State v. MoserWashington Supreme Court· 1917-02-02· cited 10×
- State v. SullivanWashington Supreme Court· 1917-08-14· cited 9×
- State v. MossWashington Supreme Court· 1913-05-06· cited 8×
- Thiemens v. SandersWashington Supreme Court· 1918-05-11· cited 7×
- State v. RasmussenWashington Supreme Court· 1923-05-18· cited 7×
- State v. RobeyWashington Supreme Court· 1913-08-06· cited 7×
- State v. WheelerWashington Supreme Court· 1916-12-05· cited 6×
- Wolfle v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1933-04-10· cited 5×
- State v. LingSupreme Court of Kansas· 1914-02-07· cited 5×
- People v. UptonMichigan Supreme Court· 1912-03-12· cited 2×
- Rhyne v. BatesCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1983-08-12· cited 1×
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Miles v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1881-04-18· cited 245×
- State v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1880-03-15· cited 101×
- People v. . HayesNew York Court of Appeals· 1894-01-16· cited 80×
- State v. FetterlyWashington Supreme Court· 1903-12-29· cited 49×
- Sackman v. ThomasWashington Supreme Court· 1901-04-20· cited 31×
- People v. MarbleMichigan Supreme Court· 1878-01-15· cited 25×
- People v. LangtreeCalifornia Supreme Court· 1883-10-26· cited 23×
- State v. McGilveryWashington Supreme Court· 1898-11-26· cited 17×
- State v. WoodWashington Supreme Court· 1903-12-02· cited 17×
- People v. StokesCalifornia Supreme Court· 1886-11-04· cited 15×
- Summerville v. SummervilleWashington Supreme Court· 1903-03-28· cited 12×
- Price v. ScottWashington Supreme Court· 1896-01-30· cited 7×
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.