State v. Roller
Citations
- 30 Wash. 692
- 71 P. 718
- 1903 Wash. LEXIS 366
Syllabus
<p>RAPE-SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDFNCE-CORROBORATION.</p> <p>In a prosecution for rape committed by a father upon his daughter, the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction, although the only evidence of the commission of the act was that of the daughter, which was contradicted by that of the father, where the daughter’s testimony was corroborated by the fact of her father’s flight when charged with his improper relations, and by a letter fr.om him to his son, after arrest, endeavoring to get the latter to have the daughter not testify against him, so that he might get out of the scrape.</p> <p>SAME-EXTRADITION-EVIDENCE-HARMLESS ERROR.</p> <p>Permitting the officer who received the custody of an extradited prisoner to testify for what crime he was extradited was harmless error, where all the proceedings in extradition, except the warrant therefor issued by the president of the United States, had been put in evidence, since, in the absence of a contrary showing, it would be presumed that the proceedings were regular, and that the warrant of extradition was in accordance with the other proceedings which were shown of record.</p> <p>SAME — ELEMENTS OF CRIME WHEN CHILD UNDER AGE OF CONSENT.</p> <p>Under Bal. Code, § 7062, which defines carnal intercourse with any female child under the age of eighteen years as rape, the act is a crime whether or not force is used, and the fact that the prosecuting witness testified in the trial that the defendant used force, while the information charged that defendant did “feloniously carnally know and abuse” the prosecutrix, would not support the objection that the defendant was extradited for one crime and tried for another.</p> <p>SAME-TRIAL UPON DIFFERENT CRIME-ABATEMENT.</p> <p>Where the crime for which defendant is placed on trial is not the one for which he was extradited, objection should be raised by plea in abatement, presenting a question of law for the court upon the record.</p> <p>WITNESSES-CROSS-EXAMINATION.</p> <p>Where
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining that rape of a child presumes force
- explaining that rape of a child presumes force
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Mount
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
13 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. GalbreathWashington Supreme Court· 1966-11-03· cited 68×
- State v. FetterlyWashington Supreme Court· 1903-12-29· cited 49×
- State v. MordenWashington Supreme Court· 1915-09-29· cited 43×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 2013-06-06· cited 41×
- State v. BirgenCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1982-09-20· cited 28×
- State v. AkerWashington Supreme Court· 1909-08-02· cited 28×
- State v. ConstantineWashington Supreme Court· 1908-01-09· cited 27×
- State v. BlaineWashington Supreme Court· 1911-07-13· cited 27×
- State v. RashSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1911-03-01· cited 13×
- State v. JonasWashington Supreme Court· 1907-12-20· cited 7×
- State v. Cherry Point Fish Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1913-03-11· cited 7×
- State v. ConlinWashington Supreme Court· 1907-02-25· cited 6×
- State v. OldhamWashington Supreme Court· 1960-09-08· cited 3×
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.