People v. Jensen
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Humboldt County denying a new trial. Clifton H. Conniek, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of “seduction under promise of marriage,” and prosecutes this appeal from the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The only point urged against the validity of the order appealed from is that the evidence does not disclose that the defendant committed the crime denounced by section 268 of the Penal Code, upon which the information upon which he was tried and convicted is founded. Said section reads as follows: “Every person who, under promise of marriage, seduces and has sexual intercourse with an unmarried female of previous chaste character, is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. AdamsOregon Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by7 opinions
- Newbern v. FarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Likowski v. CatlettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- People v. EdwardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- People v. VotawCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
- Golden v. MunsingerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.