State v. Poyner

Citations

• 57 Wash. 489
• 107 P. 181
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 782

Syllabus

<p>Lewdness — Evidence — Reputation of Paramour — Witnesses— Form op Question. In a prosecution for lewdness, a question as to the “reputation” for chastity of the defendant’s paramour, means when unqualified, ex vi termini, “general reputation,” and is not objectionable in form.</p> <p>Same — Admissibility. In a prosecution for lewdness, the general reputation of the defendant’s paramour is relevant and material.</p> <p>Appeal — -Review—Evidence—Harmless Error. Error in overruling objections to improper questions calling for the witness’ suspicions and beliefs is not prejudicial when the answers elicited merely related to competent and relevant facts and circumstances.</p> <p>Lewdness — Offense—Notoriety—Statutes—Construction. Under the statutory offense of lewdness, Rem. & Bal. Code, § 2901, for a man and woman, not being married to each other, to lewdly and viciously associate and cohabit together, it is not necessary that the acts be open and notorious or that the parties should hold themselves out as husband and wife.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Review—Record—Questions Presented — Misconduct of Counsel. An objection to a certain statement of counsel to the jury will not be considered on appeal where the record fails to show any such statement as claimed in the objection.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Former Jeopardy — Appeal From Justice — Subsequent Information. Upon appeal after a trial on a complaint before a justice of the peace, the filing of an information in the superior court does not work a dismissal of the complaint or constitute a bar to the prosecution.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Trial—Instructions. It is not prejudicial to preface an instruction to the jury by the statement that it was given at the request of the appellant.</p>