State v. Carter

(concurring). — I concur upon the ground stated by Dunbar, C. J., and because the case developed was that of rape, in fact," aside from the statute in regard to the age of consent, rather than one of seduction. State v. Lewis, 48 Iowa, 578; Croghan v. State, 22 Wis. 424; People v. Royal, 53 Cal. 62.

There was also error because the state was not put to its election as to which act of alleged intercourse it would rest the prosecution upon. The court allowed the proof to range over numerous such acts extending through a period of several years, thus leaving it entirely the subject of conjecture…