State v. . Pippin
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Willson (Or. 1925)
- Skidmore v. State (Tex. Crim. App. 1909)
- State v. McClain (N.C. 1954)
- State v. McClain (N.C. 1954)
- Abbott v. People (Colo. 1931)
- Battles v. State (Tex. Crim. App. 1910)
- State v. Wood (Wash. 1903)
- Sykes v. State (Tenn. 1903)
- State v. O'Donnell (Or. 1900)
- State v. Hurd (Iowa 1897)
- People v. Grauer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1896)
- People v. Grauer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1896)
- People v. Patterson (Cal. 1894)
- Lefforge v. State (Ind. 1891)
- State v. . Wheeler (N.C. 1889)
- State v. Wheeler (N.C. 1889)
- State v. Markins (Ind. 1884)
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
The defendants (George H. Pippin and Tabitha Hawkins) are charged with maintaining an illicit sexual intercourse during the two years preceding the finding of the bill of indictment, and, on the trial, to prove the offence, evidence was admitted of their being seen in bed together at a tinte antecedent to that protected by the statute of limitations.
The court charged the jury that it was competent for them to consider the relations between the parties as subsisting more than two years before the finding of the bill, and the other circumstances in evidence, including the fact that for the past two years and up to the trial they had lived alone in the same house.
To this instruction is directed the only exception relied on and pressed in this court. We find no error in the instruction, and it is fully warranted by the case of State v. Kemp, 87 N. C., 538. Let this be certified, &c.
No error. Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.