State v. Willett
Supreme Court of Vermont
Information for statutory rape. Plea, not guilty. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1903,. Chittenden County, Tyler, J., presiding. Verdict, guilty; judgment thereon. The respondent excepted. It was error to allow- the witness to state that the prosecutrix complained of the respondent. The witness might just as well have said “Charles Willett,” instead of using the pronoun. State v. Niles, 47 Vt. 83; State v. Carroll, 67 Vt. 497.
1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.
The information charged an pffence on the ninth day of September, and the State’s Attorney said in his opening statement that he expected to prove an offence in August. The respondent thereupon moved that the information be quashed, on the ground that it alleged an impossible date. It is certain that no- statement of a time other than the one alleged could make the one alleged an impossible date under the rules of pleading. The motion was properly overruled.
The court permitted the State to introduce evidence of intercourse had on different days, as the basis of an election, and refused to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. BridgmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1876
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
- Frary v. GushaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1886
- Houston v. RussellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1879
- Lawrence v. Graves' EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1888
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. TroupeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- State v. BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1984
- State v. WinterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1994
- State v. SheffieldUtah Supreme Court · 1915
- State v. SchuellerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.