Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

163 Wis. 359

Bishop v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 23, 1916

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1916-05-23

EbeoR to review a judgment of the circuit court for Wash-hum county: Byrow B. Park, Judge. The plaintiff in error (hereinafter called the defendant) was convicted in the Washburn county circuit court of an assault with intent to rape and was sentenced for a term of three years in the state prison. . .

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1923

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1916-05-23

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SiebeckeR, J.

¶1It is contended that the evidence fails to show that the defendant assaulted the complaining witness with intent to violate her person forcibly and against her will. The evidence is ample to support the finding that defendant committed an assault upon Mrs. Bixby. The claim is made, however, that the facts and circumstances shown by the evidence do not permit of the inference that the assault was made with intent to commit rape. The features of the case •characterizing the assault clearly disclose that defendant had the criminal intent of having carnal intercourse with the prosecutrix. The question is, Did he purpose to violate her person forcibly and against her will ? The evidence tends to show that there was a most violent assault and that defendant persisted therein until he met most effectual resistance by his victim and was in peril of discovery by others. The record discloses surrounding conditions of the assault as testified to by the prosecutrix which justified the jury in finding that the *362defendant desisted from bis intent of violating the woman forcibly and against her will by the impending peril of bodily injury from her physical resistance and the fear of discovery by other persons coming to her rescue. It is a reasonable inference from the facts that the defendant became aware of Mr. Bixby’s approach and that he realized from the resistance he met that he was in imminent peril of discovery, which caused him to flee. Under these conditions the offense is complete if the jury believed the assault was made with the intent to violate the woman forcibly and against her will. We are of the opinion that the evidence sustains the verdict and that the judgment of conviction is proper.

¶2By the Court. — The judgment is affirmed.

/163/wis/359 · .json · Public domain