Case ID: ga-app_23/html/0520-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Stephens, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

10256.
    Glover v. The State.
    Decided March 7, 1919.
    Indictment for assault with intent to rape; from Forsyth superior court—Judge Morris. November 2, 1918.
    The accused was convicted of assault and battery. In the fourth ground of the motion for a new trial it is alleged that the court eTred in charging the jury as follows: “If this defendant assaulted this woman named in the indictment, put his hands on her in a rude manner, whether in an angry manner or not, with the intention of gaining [her] consent to have sexual intercourse with him, and without the intent to overpower her and commit rape, then he would be guilty of the crime of assault and battery.” It is alleged that this was error because the laying of hands upon a person in a rude manner must be without the consent of the person, to be criminal; that however rude the manner of the man might be, if it was with the consent of the woman it could not be assault and battery. Instructions to the same effect as those set out above are complained of in the fifth ground of the motion for a new trial.
    
      J. P. Brooke, for plaintiff in error.
    
      John T. Dorsey, solicitor-general, contra.
   Stephens, J.

1. Under the particular facts of this case the 'trial judge committed no error as complained of in the fourth and fifth grounds of the motion for new trial.

2. The evidence supports the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.