E. L. WARD
v.
STATE
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.
E.L. Ward was convicted of sexual intercourse with an unmarried female under 18 of previous chaste character. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the state failed to prove the victim's previous chaste character beyond a reasonable doubt, as evidence demonstrated she had prior sexual experiences and exposure to a licentious environment.
The conviction is reversed because the state failed to establish the victim's previous chaste character beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. The preponderance of testimony showed the victim had prior sexual intercourse with other men, had contracted a venereal disease before age 11, and had lived in a sexually licentious environment, all contradicting the requirement of previous chaste character.
“In such cases the previous chaste character of the female named is a material matter and the burden is on the State to establish the condition of previous chaste character beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.”
Establishes the legal standard and burden of proof required to convict under this statute.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged with having sexual intercourse with a girl approximately 12 years old. The victim had contracted a venereal disease before age 1…
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 Statutory Rape cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was convicted of the offense of having sexual intercourse with an unmarried female under the age of eighteen years and of previous chaste character.
In such cases the previous chaste character of the female named is a material matter and the burden is on the State to establish the condition of previous chaste character beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.
In this case the proof of previous chaste character is not only unconvincing and unsatisfactory, but the great preponderance of the testimony shows that, although the girl named was only about twelve years of age at the time of the alleged offense, she was brought up and lived in an environment of lewdness and adulterous cohabitation which obtained among some of her associates and that to such extent the attributes of sexual virtue were held in disregard; that she contracted a venereal disease before she was eleven years of age and that she had indulged in sexual intercourse with other men before her alleged experience with appellant.
In fact, the record shows that the girl with whom appellant is alleged to have had unlawful sexual intercourse had, prior to the trial, stated under oath that at least three men, whom she named in the statement, had had sexual intercourse with her before her alleged experience with appellant, and she swore on the trial *109that the previous sworn statements were freely and voluntarily made, though she denied the truth of the statements in her testimony on the trial. Other evidence introduced on the trial substantiates the truth of her previous sworn statements.
Having reached the conclusion stated, supra, it is unnecessary for us to discuss other contentions presented by appellant.
For the reasons stated, the judgment is reversed.
So ordered.
BROWN, C. J„ WHITFIELD, and ADAMS, JJ., concur.