Legal Opinion

State v. Burns

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 8, 1903PublishedCited by 24 opinions

Appeal from O'Brien District Oourt. — Hon. John F. Oliver, Judge, Dependant was tried upon an indictment charging him with the crime of seduction, and having been adjudged guilty, appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtWeaver, J.

i. variance in piosecutrix. The indictment charges the seduction of Mary Ellen O’Grady. Upon the trial the prosecuting witness gave her name as Nellie O’Grady, and was so named and called by other witnesses who spoke of her in testimony. It is argued that this is a fatal variance and requires a reversal. The rule of law which requires an indictment for seduction to state the name of the woman charged to have been seduced is in ■ tended to apprise the accused of the identity of the person thus alleged to have been wronged. In modern criminal practice, merely formal errors and yerbal variances,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. CarnagySupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
  2. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
  3. State v. Carr & BrownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
  4. State v. EmmonsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
  5. State v. EmeighSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Willie Lee Stewart v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
  2. State v. RobySupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
  3. State v. DudleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  4. State v. HastySupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
  5. State v. BurrisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API