State v. Whitley.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
INDICTMENT for seduction under promise of marriage-against C. D. Whitley, heard by Judge W. B. Councill and a jury, at the January Term, 1906, of the Superior Court of Stanly. From the judgment pronounced on the verdict of.' guilty, the defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
INDICTMENT for seduction under promise of marriage-against C. D. Whitley, heard by Judge W. B. Councill and a jury, at the January Term, 1906, of the Superior Court of Stanly. From the judgment pronounced on the verdict of.' guilty, the defendant appealed. The indictment alleged that on a designated day defendant did with force and arms at and in a certain county unlawfully, wilfully, and feloniously seduce one Flora 0. Eudy, an innocent and virtuous woman, under promise of' marriage to the said Flora C. Eudy, made by him, the said! Devotion Whitley, against the form of the statute, and…
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
The indictment follows the exact words of the statute. Revisal, sec. 3354. The added words are mere surplusage and do not-affect the bill. Revisal, sec. 3254, forbids the arrest of judgment “by reason of any informality or refinement.”
In State v. Ferguson, 107 N. C., 850, the court says: “The crime does not consist in the sexual intercourse nor in the seduction, nor in the innocence and virtue of the woman, but in committing the act under 'promise of marriage, without which no crime is created by the statute, and which alone makes the seduction criminal.” It was clearly competent for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. . FergusonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. . PaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- State v. . TuttleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- State v. . RaynorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- State v. . FulcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- State v. CookeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.