Kelly v. State
Cases that cite this one
21 later published cases cite this decision.
- Clevenger v. State (Ala. Civ. App. 1979)
- Mensing. v. Croter (Cal. 1930)
- Bembo v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1924)
- Brantley v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1914)
- Mitchell v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1962)
- State v. Giles (Ala. Ct. App. 1961)
- Strickling v. Whiteside (Ala. 1941)
- Watkins v. State (Ala. 1929)
- Yielding v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1929)
- Narrell v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1928)
- Shadix v. Brown (Ala. 1927)
- Thorne v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1925)
- Anderson v. State (Utah 1925)
- Guy v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1924)
- DeMund v. State (Wis. 1918)
- Flores v. State (Fla. 1916)
- Sims v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 1915)
- Watts v. State (Ala. Ct. App. 1913)
- People v. Richardson (Cal. 1911)
- State v. Danforth (N.H. 1905)
- State ex rel. Berge v. Patterson (S.D. 1904)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
There is in Paulk v. State, 52 Ala. 427, ¡this diclrnn: “On an issue formed in a bast
We are, however, of the opinion that the court erred in excluding the evidence offered by the defendant of the association of the prosecutrix with others, and partieulaidy with another young man about the probable date of conception, and the circumstances of such association; the State having proved defendant’s (association with her about that time as affording an inference that he then had sexual intercourse with her. It seems clear to us that the proposed testimony of the witnesses Sellers and Barr, that covering the time of probable conception she was in the company of other men and that on one occasion nine months before the birth of the child she was in company of another man under circumstances affording opportunity for sexual intercourse, his attentions to her at that time, etc., etc., wfis competent in rebuttal of the inference intended to be and naturally afforded by the evidence introduced by the State as to the association of defendant with her about that time.
For the rejection of this evidence the judgment must be reversed. The cause is remanded. •
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.