People v. Howard
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order denying a new trial. H. Z. Austin, Judge. The main facts are stated in the opinion of Commissioner Cooper. Further facts are stated in the concurring opinion of Beatty, Chief Justice.
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
The defendant is charged in the information with the crime of rape, alleged to have been committed on the fifteenth day of August, 1901, by having sexual intercourse with Irene Farias, a female under sixteen years of age. He was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment at San Quentin for thirty years. This was beyond the expectancy of defendant’s life for that which was not a crime at common law and only a misdemeanor in many jurisdictions. (People v. Derbert, 138 Cal. 467.)
1. It is claimed that there is no evidence that defendant ever had sexual intercourse with Irene Farias, and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hardtke v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. WestlakeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. DerbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- People v. TerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- State v. DaltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
3Cited by41 opinions
- People v. LindleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- People v. Wong LoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- People v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- People v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- State v. WorkmanWashington Supreme Court · 1911
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.