JOE TURNER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Joe Turner was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape on a female child under ten years old and sentenced to four years imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting Turner's challenges to the indictment form and the admission of hearsay evidence of the victim's prompt complaint to her father.
The information was sufficiently proper and not fatally defective; the father's testimony regarding the child's prompt complaint was admissible; and the evidence was ample to support the conviction. The defendant's intoxication defense was not a valid defense to the charge.
“The information is not so fatally defective as to call for voluntary action on our part, and the plaintiff has waived every defect which he might waive.”
Establishes that the indictment form was adequate and any defects were waived by failure to object at trial
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoe Turner was charged with unlawfully and forcibly assaulting a female child under age ten with intent to carnally know her. Within an hour or two af…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Age Of Consent cases and more on FLexlaw
Cockrell, J.
Under an information charging that Joe Turner “did then and there unlawfully and forcibly commit an assault upon one A * * , a female child under the age of ten years, then and there attempting to unlawfully abuse and carnally know said female child,” he was convicted and sentenced to a term of four years in the State prison.
The form of the indictment was not questioned in the trial court, nor is there any assignment of error here upon which an argument against it may be properly predicated. The child was below the age of consent and the pleading differs materially from the indictment in Hogan v. State, 50 Fla. 86, 39 South. Rep. 464, which was attacked by a motion in arrest, and which failed to allege even an assault as an overt act. It also differs material ly from the Hogan case which confounded the two crimes of voluntary and involuntary sexual connection in one count. The information is not so fatally defective as to •call for voluntary action on our part, and the plaintiff has waived every defect which he might waive.
The first error assigned is that the court erred in permitting the father to state what the girl told him. It appears that within an hour or two after the alleged assault the little girl met her father and told him about it. It is admitted that it is permissible to show that complaint was promptly made of the commission of the offense and that the perpetrator may be named, but it is argued that the little girl went too much into details. We find in effect that this is about all the little girl told her father. She told it in her childish language, and there was no effort made to exclude any portion that might by possibility overstep the rule.
No objection was interposed to any testimony of the sister, a twelve year old witness to the assault, nor we¡e the charges excepted to; consequently the assignments numbered two and three need not be considered.
The evidence is ample to show that Joe Turner attempted to procure this child to have intercourse with her, and that she fought him until she succeeded in escaping his clutches. The only defense he offers is that he was drunk and did not know what he was doing. We are not disposed to interfere with the verdict, and the judgment is affirmed.
Shackleford, C. J., and Taylor, Hocker and Whitfield, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Burr, 79 Fla. 290 (Fla. 1920)…r street railroads. It is appropriate that the city be heard in this proceeding, and its counsel joined in the motion to quash, and participated in the argument and has filed briefs. ' See City of Gainesville v. Gainesville Gas & Electric Power Co., 66 Fla. 404, 62 South. Rep. 919; Southern Public Utilities Co. v. City of Charlotte, - N. C.-, 101 S. E. Rep. 619; State ex rel. Indianapolis Traction Co. v. Lewis,--Ind.-120 N. E. Rep. 129. When a tribunal refuses to exercise jurisdiction that it clearly poss…
-
Purdy v. State, 343 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1977)…the child, and the actual physical condition of the child. The child’s out-of-court declaration refuted any inference questioning the identity of the assailant. Such testimony properly may be admitted for that purpose. Turner v. State, 66 Fla. 404, 63 So. 708 (1913); Thomas v. State and Vinson v. State, 220 So. 2d 638 (Fla.3d DCA 1969). We hold it was properly allowed in evidence as an exception to [*6] the hearsay rule. See generally Annot., 83 A.L.R.2d 1368 (1962). The other points raised by the appel…
-
Custer v. State, 159 Fla. 574 (Fla. 1947)…d cannot be given in evidence on the trial of the case by the party to whom she made the statement. Such testimony is hearsay, and it is calculated to confuse and mislead the jury, and is not permissible. ...” See also Turner v. State, 66 Fla. 404, 63 So. 708. Explanation, sanction and reason for the rule may be found in 44 Am. Jur. 952-955, Secs. 82, 83 and 84. In one sentence the mother told that the victim complained to her a few hours after the alleged rape that defendant had raped her. Then, contrar…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hogan v. State, 50 Fla. 86 (Fla. 1905)