Watt v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentRobinson, J.
The majority opinion says: “Appellant earnestly insists that since no act of sexual intercourse took place or was attempted by him, he could not be convicted under the above section of the statute (Ark. Stat. § 41-3406). We do not agree.” Thus the majority holds that notwithstanding no sexual intercourse took place or was attempted, the defendant is guilty of carnal abuse; but significantly no authority is cited to sustain this position.
I agree with counsel for the defendant; there can be no carnal abuse within the meaning of our statute without at least an attempt to have carnal knowledge of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lee v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1943
- Plunkett v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Curtis v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Carothers v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Hooper v. Farmers' Union Warehouse Co.Alabama Court of Appeals · 1924