122 A. 738 | N.J. | 1923
Defendant was indicted and convicted of carnal abuse — statutory rape, so-called. The Supreme Court, in an elaborate opinion by Mr. Justice Kalisch, reversed the conviction because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and for other reasons. We think the reversal was right because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, but without excluding any of it; but we *95 disagree with the view expressed that the evidence of the commission of other criminal acts between the same parties, like those laid down in the indictment, are inadmissible.
In State v. Raymond,
The commission of the sexual act in one or more instances, we think, tends to prove it in another instance, and our cases so decide.
In State v. Snover,
The Supreme Court says that while no objection was made to the admission of this testimony, yet it could not have failed to produce passion in the minds of the jury against the accused. But this deliverance cannot be approved.
This court held in State v. Morchouse,
In all other respects we are satisfied with the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Kalisch in the Supreme Court. The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons given by him, except as they conflict with the reasons above expressed.
For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, MINTURN, WHITE, HEPPENHEIMER, ACKERSON, VAN BUSKIRK, JJ. 9.
For reversal — None.