Mitchell v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Appeal from the District Court of Jefferson. Tried below before the Hon. W. H. Pope. Appeal from a conviction of sodomy; penalty, five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIDSON, Presiding Judge.
The charge was sodomy. The court in his charge submitted as a predicate for conviction that one of the parties used the mouth of the other. This is criticised in motion for new trial as not being the law. The same question was discussed in Prindle v. State, 31 Texas Crim. Rep., 551, where it was held, that such fact did not constitute the crime of sodomy. See also Peo. v. Boyle, 116 Cal., 658, 48 Pac. Rep., 800; 1 Wharton's Crim. Law, sec. 579. McClain’s Crim. Law, sec. 1153; 25 Amer. & Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 1145, and note 5, for authorities. Without further…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Prindle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1893
- People v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by11 opinions
- Pruett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1970
- Kinnan v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1910
- Commonwealth v. PoindexterCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
- State v. CyrSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1938
- Barton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.