TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Eldridge v. State

Eldridge v. State, 23 S.E. 832 (Ga. 1895)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 13, 1895
Judges
Atkinson
Citations
23 S.E. 83297 Ga. 192
Summary
Accusation of adultery. Before Judge Proffitt. City court of Elbert county. March term, 1895. Rachel Eldridge, a married woman, was convicted of adultery committed with Anderson Starlce, a married man. She moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence; and the motion was overruled. The testimony for the State was, that defendant and Starke were both employed on the place of "Wilhite; that there was but one cabin on the place for them to stay in, which was given to defendant to live in, but Starke lived in there with her, there being nowhere else on the place for him to stay; that his duties called him to be on the place; that the house was only one room, twelve feet square, and contained but one bed; and that he had frequently gone into the house at night and come out in the morning'. Starke testified that he frequently occupied the room with defendant, but never had sexual intercourse with her. There was nowhere else on Wilhite’s place for him to stay, and his duties required his presence there. His wife lived three miles away, and he could not go there at night and be back next morning in time for his work. Defendant slept in her bed in the room, and he slept on a pallet on the other side of the room. Defendant stated that she never had sexual intercourse with Starke, and was not guilty.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Atkinson

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Atkinson, J.

The evidence in this case, though entirely circumstantial, was sufficient to warrant the conviction; and the verdict of guilty having been approved by the trial judge, this court will not overrule his refusal to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Dissent

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Simmons, C. J.,

dissenting. — A conviction should not be sustained where it is manifest that the verdict was predicated merely on suspicion and against the positive evidence'of a legally credible unimpeached witness.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1904: 11906: 11907: 11910: 11913: 11914: 11918: 11935: 11938: 11965: 11975: 119042026peak 1904 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Johnson v. State141 S.E.2d 574 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)
  2. State v. Richardson50 P.2d 1012 (Idaho 1935)
  3. State v. Thompson111 N.W. 319 (Iowa 1907)
  4. Harrison v. Odum96 S.E. 1038 (Ga. 1918)
  5. Johnson v. State46 S.E. 634 (Ga. 1904)
  6. MacK v. MacK217 S.E.2d 278 (Ga. 1975)

Most recent

  1. MacK v. MacK217 S.E.2d 278 (Ga. 1975)
  2. Johnson v. State141 S.E.2d 574 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)
  3. Hathcock v. State195 S.E. 308 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938)
  4. State v. Richardson50 P.2d 1012 (Idaho 1935)
  5. Harrison v. Odum96 S.E. 1038 (Ga. 1918)
  6. O'Neal v. State83 S.E. 861 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list