Bodiford v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
From the Circuit Court of Coffee. Tried'before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. The indictment in this case charged that William Bodiford and Fanny Caldwell did live together in a state of adultery or fornication.
Read the full summary
From the Circuit Court of Coffee. Tried'before the Hon. Jesse M. Carmichael. The indictment in this case charged that William Bodiford and Fanny Caldwell did live together in a state of adultery or fornication. On the trial of said Bodiford, he reserved exceptions to each of the following charges, which were given by the court to the jury: (1.) “Occasional acts of adultery between parties does not make out the offense of adultery within the meaning of the law ; but, if there had been an act of adulterous intercourse between them, and there was a state or condition of their minds, to the…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, C. J.
To constitute a living in adultery, within the statute — Code of 1886, § 4012 — a single, or occasional act, without more, is not sufficient. There must be continuation, or an agreement for continuation, coupled with one or more acts, before it can be affirmed that the relation is established. It is a crime of darkness and secrecy, and hence always difficult of direct proof. On this account it is held, that when acts and complicating circumstances are proved, it becomes largely a question for the jury to determine, whether there was in fact such continuation as amounted to a living together,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- State v. CrowleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Collins v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Quartemas v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1872
3Cited by19 opinions
- State v. GardnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- Brown v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1943
- People v. PotterAppellate Court of Illinois · 1943
- Boice v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1914
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.