Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

76 Mo. App. 482

State v. Hopson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 7, 1898

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1898-11-07

— Hon. Andrew Ellison, Judge. The charge of “openly, lewdly and lasciviously abiding and cohabiting,” is stating an offense, and is a good charge. It will sustain an indictment. State v. Coffee, 39 Mo. App. 56; State v. Osborne, 69 Mo. 143. This last case is directly in point and should be decisive of the question. Also see R. S. 1889, sec. 3798; State v. Bess, 20 Mo. 419; R. S. 1889, sec. 3798; State v. Walker, 24 Mo. App. 679.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1915

1 state decisions

Relies on State v. Bess · Dameron v. State · State v. Coffee

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · Decided 1898-11-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Smith, P. J.

¶1The information charged that the defendant “did then and there unlawfully commit and was guilty of open, gross lewdness and lascivious behavior by then and there openly, lewdly and lasciviously abiding and cohabiting with one Hattie Rice, she the said Hattie Rice then and there not being the wife of the said Reuben Hopson, and he the said Reuben Hopson being then and there an unmarried man.” On demurrer this information was adjudged insufficient. The state has appealed.

¶2The statute, section 3798, Revised Statutes, provides that every person, married or unmarried, who shall be guilty of open, gross lewdness, or lascivious behavior, shall be adjudged guilty of a misdemeanor. The charge contained in the information follows the exact language of the statute and is sufficient. The manner in which the offense was committed was by the *484defendant’s openly, lewdly and lasciviously cohabiting with the said Hattie Rice. This specification was sufficient ; for what act could be more grossly lewd and lascivious than for a man and woman not married to ■each other to be openly living together and cohabiting with each other? State v. Coffee, 39 Mo. App. 56; State v. Bess, 20 Mo. 420; State v. Dameron, 8 Mo. 494; State v. Osborne, 69 Mo. 143.

¶3Accordingly it results that the judgment must be reversed and cause remanded.

All concur.
/76/moapp/482 · .json · Public domain