63 Ind. App. 671 | Ind. Ct. App. | 1916
Appellant was convicted in the juvenile court of Marion county for contributing to the delinquency of a girl under the age of sixteen years. An appeal having been prayed to this court the judge of the juvenile court, as directed by §1635 Burns 1914, Acts 1907 p. 221, certified the facts of the ease in the form of a special finding.
For the purposes of this appeal it is unnecessary to set out these findings in full. It is sufficient to say that they show the grossest misconduct on the part of appellant. They show that by the most deceptive and basest practices he induced and persuaded-, a girl then under the age of sixteen years, on different days during the month of August, 1915, to accompany him to the Elite Hotel in the city of Indianapolis and there committed acts of the most revolting nature with the girl and persuaded her to have illicit sexual intercourse with him, all of which of necessity contributed to her delinquency.
allowed by the statute regulating such appeals is, “that the decision of the court is contrary to law.” §1635 Burns 1914, supra. This statute provides “an assignment of error that the decision of the juvenile court is contrary to law” shall be sufficient to present both the sufficiency of the facts found to sustain the judgment and the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the findings. See, also, Murphy v. State (1915), 61 Ind. App. 226, 111 N. E. 806.
Appellant now claims that the finding is insufficient because it fails to show that the alleged offense was committed prior to the time of filing the affidavit, and that the use of the words “on or about” a particular day is not certain enough.
Note.—Reported in 113 N. E. 703. Appeals from judgments of juvenile courts, procedure, Ann. Cas. 1916E 1017. Meaning of “on or about,” 17 Ann. Cas. 742 ; 29 Cyc 1492.