Legal Opinion

State v. Friddles

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1912PublishedCited by 14 opinions

From Wallowa: JOHN W. KNOWLES, Judge. The defendant, Robert Friddles, was convicted of the crime of rape, and from the resulting judgment and sentence, he appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bean

1. The principal errors claimed by counsel for defendant are that the evidence on the part of the State is insuf*210ficient to sustain a conviction for the reason that the testimony of the prosecutrix, Rosie Prestwood, a girl of the age of sixteen years, whom the defendant is alleged to have forcibly ravished, was not corroborated, and that she failed to make complaint until about five months afterward; that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a directed verdict of acquittal and in refusing to instruct the jury to find the defendant not guilty as requested by counsel for…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. GageMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. State v. MulkernSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1892
  3. State v. ColestockOregon Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. WagnerOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Taylor v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State v. FolkesOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  4. State of Oregon v. CahillOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  5. State v. BurkeOregon Supreme Court · 1928

9 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