State v. Acklus
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtTolman, J.
— Appellant was tried and convicted upon a charge of carnally knowing a female child of the age of thirteen years. Appealing, he assigns error upon the admission of certain testimony, and also contends that the verdict is contrary to the evidence.
A physician was called by the state and testified to having made a physical examination of the prosecuting witness, and detailed the conditions which he found to exist. He was then permitted to testify, over the objection of appellant, that, in his opinion, the prosecuting witness had had sexual intercourse. In cases of this kind the rules must be…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
- People v. HareMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- State v. RainsbargerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- J. M. Pace Mule Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. SoszynskiAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. RingWashington Supreme Court · 1959
- State v. CoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- State v. HedinWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1944
- Flyzik v. Travelers InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.