Case Name: George Petty v. The State
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1922-11-01
Citations: 94 Tex. Crim. 114
Docket Number: No. 7168
Parties: George Petty v. The State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Criminal Reports
Volume: 94
Pages: 114–119

Head Matter:
George Petty v. The State.
No. 7168.
Decided November 1, 1922.
Decided March 28, 1923.
1. —Rape—Female Under Age of Consent — Order of Evidence.
Where, upon trial of rape upon a female under the age of consent, the testimony of the prosecutrix was not introduced by the State until after defendant himself had testified, held that there was no reversible error, as the latitude given to trial courts in the order of the introduction of testimony is almost without limitation, unless there be an affirmative showing of injury; besides the' testimony of prosecutrix was principally in rebuttal.
2. —Same—Rehearing—Statutory Rape — Penetration.
If the conviction was for the offense of assault to rape the evidence in the instant case would support the conviction, but to constitute the offense of rape proof of penetration is absolutely essential although this may be shown by circumstances, but it must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. — Following Davis v. State, 43 Texas Grim. Rep., 189, and other cases.
3. — Same—Rape—Penetration—Sufficiency of the Evidence.
Where, upon trial of statutory rape, the prosecutrix, introduced on the part of the State, denied penetration, and simply admitted the effort on the part of the defendant to have sexual intercourse with her, but combatted the essential element of the State’s case to establish the offense of which defendant is convicted, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.
Appeal from the District Court of Ellis. Tried below before the Hon. W. L. Harding.
Appeal from a conviction of statutory rape; penalty, five years imprisonment in the penitentiary.
The opinion states the case.
No brief on file for appellant.
R. G. Storey, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Opinion:
LATTIMORE, Judge.
Appellant was convicted in the District Court of Ellis County of the offense of rape upon a girl under the age of consent and given five years in the penitentiary.
There was abundant evidence showing numerous occasions on which the appellant met the little girl in question, who was but fourteen years of age, and took her out riding in his car. Appellant was a married man. One witness testified positively to seeing an act of intercourse between appellant and prosecutrix. Two physicians who examined the child said that her private parts were enlarged so as that she could easily have had intercourse with a man.
There is but one bill of exceptions in the record which presents appellant's objection to the introduction of the girl as a witness after appellant had himself testified, it being objected that this was not rebuttal evidence. The latitude given to our trial courts in the order of the introduction of testimony is almost without limitation, and unless there be an affirmative showing of some injury or the probability thereof from the action of the court in allowing the State to introduce evidence after the defendant has closed, we will not ordinarily review the action of the court below. See Art. 718, Vernon-Sayles C. C. P. and authorities cited; Hewitt v. State, 10 Texas Crim. App. 506; Mancha v. State, 57 Texas Crim. Rep. 335. An examination of the testimony of the witness complained of reveals the fact that much of her testimony was in rebuttal. Appellant positively affirmed that he had never driven her out in his car but three times, and that he had never hugged her or kissed her, or indulged in familiarity with her person. She contradicted him upon each of the.above questions.
Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.
Affirmed.