Green v. State
Green v. State
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury. We may conjecture the purpose of the defendant to have been to commit a rape, but, on the facts disclosed, it is conjecture only, and not an inference reasonably drawn from the evidence. The probabilities may be greater that a rape was intended rather than robbery or murder, but mere probability of guilt of a particular crime, and that, too, springing more from instinct than from proved facts, cannot support a verdict of guilty.
There is great danger of improper convictions in cases of this character,, and, while the court should not for that reason invade the province of the jury, the danger admonishes us of the necessity' of standing firmly upon the right and duty of proper supervision and control of them.
The judgment is reversed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Ben Green v. State
- Cited By
- 15 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Criminal Law. Assault withintent to commit rape. Evidence. Casein judgment. On a trial for assault with intent to commit rape, the evidence showed that the prosecutrix was riding alone on horse-back along the highway, when the defendant, a negro man and stranger, who had followed her on foot a short distance, ran up and caught her riding-skirt with one hand, where- . upon she urged on her horse and escaped, the defendant fleeing in another direction. Held, that the evidence was insufficient to support a verdict of guilty. 2. Same. Conjecture. Mere probability of guilt insufficient to convict. It is conjecture, and not an inference reasonably drawn from the evidence that the defendant intended a rape rather than robbery or murder. Mere probability of guilt of a particular crime, and that, too, springing more •from instinct than from facts proved, cannot support a conviction.