Cheaney v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
ERROR to Pope Circuit Court. Hon. W. D. Jacoway, Circuit Judge. Evidence shows appellant to have been guilty of rape. He could not be convicted of seduction. 22 Wis., 444. If there had been intention of marriage, the statute does not apply.
1Opinion of the CourtEnglish, C. J.
At the November term, 1879, of the circuit court of Franklin county, P. 0. Cheaney was indicted for seduction under a false promise of marriage.
The indictment charged that “said P. 0. Cheaney, on the twenty-ninth day of June, 1879, in the county of Franklin, etc., being a single and unmarritd man, unlawfully and feloniously did obtain carnal knowledge of one Mary Head, a single and unmarried female, by virtue of a false express promise of marriage to her previously made by the said P. 0. Cheaney ; against the peace,” etc.
Defendant demurred to the indictment on the grounds that it did not…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Bennett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- Creekmore v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
- Burrell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
- Allgood v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Caldwell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.