State v. Sigler
Citations
- 116 Wash. 581
- 200 P. 323
- 1921 Wash. LEXIS 982
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law (107)—Evidence—Other Offenses. In a prosecution for unlawfully having sexual intercourse with a female child under the age of eighteen years, evidence that defendant had given the prosecuting witness capsules to prevent pregnancy, and that he had arranged with a physician to operate upon her to bring about a miscarriage, was properly admissible as directly tending to establish his guilt of the crime charged, though such proof tended to-show guilt of other offenses.</p> <p>Rape (1, 5)—Statutes—“Previous Chaste Character”—Defenses. Under Rem. Code, § 2436, making it a crime to carnally know a female child “fifteen and under eighteen years of age, and of previously chaste character,” a requested instruction “that the phrase ‘previously chaste character’ is not limited alone to sexual intercourse, but includes purity in conduct and principle up to the time of the commission of the alleged offense,” was properly refused, since the term “previously chaste character” means an actual physical condition as distinct from a chaste state of mind.</p> <p>Rape (19)—Evidence—“Previous Chaste Character”—Presumptions. In a prosecution for having carnal knowledge of a female child between fifteen andi eighteen years of age, a requested instruction that “previously chaste character .... is not presumed but must be proven by the state as a fact,” was properly refused, the rule in this state being that the chastity of the woman will he presumed in cases of this character.</p> <p>Trial (101)—Instructions—Requests Already Given. The refusal of a proper requested instruction is not error where the court, in its own language, substantially charges the jury to the same effect.</p> <p>Criminal Law (358, 362)—New Trial—Cumulative Evidence. The refusal of the court to grant a new trial because of newly discovered evidence did not show an abuse of discretion, where it appeared that the new evidence was largely cumulative, and would not be likely to change the result at another tr
Judges: Bridges
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. WorkmanWashington Supreme Court· 1911-12-19· cited 56×
- State v. GottfreedsonWashington Supreme Court· 1901-03-30· cited 36×
- State v. StorrsWashington Supreme Court· 1920-10-13· cited 24×
- State v. KaukosWashington Supreme Court· 1919-12-15· cited 16×
- State v. DackeWashington Supreme Court· 1910-06-30· cited 14×
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.