Whipp v. State
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Medina county. The plaintiffs, Rachel H. Whipp and Lonsdale P. Spensley, were jointly indicted and tried for a felonious assault upon Robert Whipp, the husband of said Rachel, “ with intent him, the said Robert, to kill and murder.” The record shows that said Robert Whipp was permitted, against the objection of both the plaintiffs, to testify to the circumstances of the alleged assault.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Medina county. The plaintiffs, Rachel H. Whipp and Lonsdale P. Spensley, were jointly indicted and tried for a felonious assault upon Robert Whipp, the husband of said Rachel, “ with intent him, the said Robert, to kill and murder.” The record shows that said Robert Whipp was permitted, against the objection of both the plaintiffs, to testify to the circumstances of the alleged assault. The plaintiff's were convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary. The ruling permitting the husband to testify against his wife is the principal ei’ror assigned. Other…
1Opinion of the CourtBoynton, J.
At common law, the general rule is well settled, that husband and wife are incompetent to testify for or against each other, either in civil or criminal cases. And while the rule has been largely modified in civil cases, and the incompetency to a great extent removed, in criminal cases it still prevails. Steen v. The State, 20 Ohio St. 333. But at an early date, an exception, said to arise from necessity, was declared to exist in cases of personal injury to the wife inflicted by the husband. The first reported case, in which the point was adjudicated, was that of Lord Audley, decided in 1631.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. NeillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844