Legal Opinion

State v. Brow

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 5, 1888PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Indictment, upon Gen. Laws, c. 274, s. 10, for wilfully and deceitfully enticing away a female child under the age of eighteen years, with the intent and for the purpose of prostitution.

Read the full summary

Indictment, upon Gen. Laws, c. 274, s. 10, for wilfully and deceitfully enticing away a female child under the age of eighteen years, with the intent and for the purpose of prostitution. The evidence for the government tended to show that the defendent enticed the person named in the indictment, a girl of the ago of sixteen years, from her home in Newport, in this county, and unlawfully cohabited with her, as his wife, under assumed names, at several places in Massachusetts, for five or six days. The defendant requested the court to instruct the jury that if he only intended to obtain the…

1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.

The defendant’s purpose of keeping the girl as his mistress was not “ the purpose of prostitution ” within the meaning of Gen. Laws, c. 274, s. 10.

Exceptions sustained.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. GardnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  2. Pinson v. City of BirminghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Pinson v. City of BirminghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API