Donley v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The indictment charged appellant with the rape of Maud Foust, a female so mentally diseased as to have no will to oppose the act of carnal knowledge, add who was also under 15 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense. No statement necessary.
1Opinion of the Court
BROOKS, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of rape, and given thirty-five years in the penitentiary.
In bill number 1 appellant insists that the court should have charged the prosecutrix was an accomplice. Under article 633, Penal Code, it is made rape to have carnal intercourse with a female under the age of 15 years, with or without her consent, she not being the wife of the accused. No case can be found where it requires the court to treat the prosecutrix as an accomplice, and charge the law of accomplice testimony in reference to her evidence. Hamilton v. State, 36 Texas Crim. Rep., 372.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hamilton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
- Bice v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1897
- Anthony v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1900
3Cited by3 opinions
- Adams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1923
- Poulter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Hindman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1948