WILLIE JOWERS, 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.
Willie Jowers was indicted for rape of a child under ten years old but convicted of assault with intent to commit rape. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment's language was sufficiently comprehensive to support conviction on the lesser included offense.
The court held that evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict and that under Florida law, an indictment alleging rape of a female child under ten years old is sufficiently comprehensive in language to permit conviction of the lesser included offense of assault with intent to commit rape.
“The credibility of the evidence was a question for the jury who saw and heard the witnesses. The verdict has the sanction of the trial judge. We cannot say the evidence is insufficient.”
Court's reasoning for accepting the jury's verdict as supported by sufficient evidence
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJowers was indicted under Florida law for unlawfully ravishing and carnally knowing a female child under ten years old. At trial, the child, her mothe…
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 Assault With Intent To Commit Rape cases and more on FLexlaw
West, J.
Plaintiff in error wag. indicted on a charge of rape. The indictment alleges that he did “unlawfully ravish and carnally know and abuse a female child under the age of ten years.” The charge is predicated upon Section 5051, Revised General Statutes of Florida, 1920, Upon a trial a verdict was returned finding him guilty of an assault with intent to commit rape. Motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial were denied and sentence was imposed. To review the judgment .imposing sentence this writ of error was taken.
Two questions are presented. The first raises the ques: tion of the sufficiency of the evidence tó sustain the' verdict. Nothing would be accomplished by a discussion of the evidence. The child alleged to have been assaulted, its mother and a physician, who examined the child, testified to the fact of the assault. Other witnesses testified to facts showing that an opportunity was afforded plaintiff in error to commit the offense. The credibility of the evidence was a question for the jury who saw and heard the witnesses. The verdict has the sanction of the trial judge. We cannot say the evidence is insufficient. On the contrary, it seems to be ample to sustain the verdict.
The other contention is that under the allegations of the indictment plaintiff in error could not be legally convicted of an assault with intent to commit the crime charged. This contention is without merit. The language employed is sufficiently comprehensive to include the offense of assault with intent to commit the crime of rape. In Schang v. State, 43 Fla. 561, 31 South. Rep. 346, this court, in considering a case based upon this statute,-said: “Our conclusions are that under our statutes the unlawful carnal knowledge and abuse of a female under the age of ten years is rape; that under an indictment in terms charging such carnal knowledge and abuse of such female child there may properly be a conviction of an assault with intent to' commit rape.”
The judgment is affirmed upon the authority of Schang v. State, supra.
Affirmed.
Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur. Browne, C. J., concurs on authority of Schang v. State, 43 Fla. 561, on doctrine of Stare decisis.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lewis v. The Honorable Nathan Mayo, 127 Fla. 488 (Fla. 1937)…the felony with intent to commit which he was charged with breaking and entering the building. We have repeatedly held that Section 5051 R. G. S., 7153 C. G. L., defines the crime of rape. Schang v. State, 43 Fla. 561, 31 Sou. 346, Jowers v. State, 81 Fla. 803, 88 Sou. 880; Russel v. State, 71 Fla. 236, 71 Sou. 27. The Petitioner next contends that he should be discharged because the judgment is erroneóus. We hold that the judgment is defective'in that it does not adjudge the defendant guilty of breaking…
-
Washington v. State, 247 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)…t degree. The Supreme Court, in affirming the conviction of manslaughter, stated: “Such a charge comprehends all other degrees of homicide. The jury was warranted in returning a verdict for one of the lesser degrees of homicide.” In Jowers v. State, 81 Fla. 803, 88 So. 880 (1921), the Supreme Court noted that an indictment charging that defendant did “unlawfully ravish and carnally know and abuse a female child under the age of 10 years” was sufficient to include the offense of assault with intent to commi…
Authorities Cited
- Schang v. State, 43 Fla. 561 (Fla. 1901)