People v. Ratz
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. William T. Wallace, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHeeshaw, J.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of rape, in having had carnal intercourse with a female child under the age of fourteen years, and not his wife. The intercourse was admitted. The age of the child was a question in dispute. It was conceded that the intercourse was not had through force or violence, so that if, at the time thereof, the child was over the age of fourteen years, the crime of rape was not committed.
The child herself testified to her age, as well as to the date of the intercourse. Her evidence went to show that, at the time when Ratz carnally knew her, she was under the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bain v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Hill v. EldridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- People v. DolanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Cherry v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- People v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by49 opinions
- People v. HernandezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- In Re JenningsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. GuestAlaska Supreme Court · 1978
- People v. OlsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- People v. McClennegenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.