Carroll v. State
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Russell, O. J.
Where one charged with crime is between the ages of ten and fourteen, there is a presumption that he is non capax doli, and the State carries the burden of rebutting by proof this presumption. In the present case the only evidence touching the age of the defendant was that he was only thirteen years of age at the time of the commission of the alleged offense, and there were no circumstances in proof, nor is there anything in the record, from which a contrary inference can be deduced. The prosecution having wholly failed to rebut the presumption arising from proof that the defendant was under fourteen years of age, the verdict finding him guilty was contrary to evidence and contrary to law, and the trial judge erred in overruling .the motion for a new trial. Judgment reversed.
Conviction of assault with intent to rape; from Floyd superior court — Judge Wright.. February 15, 1916. Eubanlcs & Mebane, for plaintiff in error. W. H. Ennis, solicitor-general, contra.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.