McQuirter v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals · 1953 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawAttemptAssault with intent to rapeIntentConfessionsattemptassault with intent to rapecriminal intent

Facts

Mrs. Allen testified that after she and her children left the Tiny Diner at night, the appellant got out of a parked truck, followed her closely down the street, came near her at the Lufkin house, later emerged from behind a telephone pole, and then waited near her home until he saw Mr. Simmons. Mrs. Allen's daughter and Mr. Simmons corroborated that appellant followed or waited near Mrs. Allen and her home. Police officers testified that after arrest appellant stated he had come to Atmore intending to get a white woman, that he decided to get the first woman who came by, followed Mrs. Allen, planned to carry her into the cotton patch, and would kill her if she hollered. Appellant denied following Mrs. Allen or making the statements and offered evidence of good reputation.

Issue

Was the evidence sufficient to submit to the jury and sustain a conviction for attempt to commit an assault with intent to rape? Were the officers' accounts of appellant's statements admissible despite the defense claim that no sufficient overt act or corpus delicti had been shown?

Rule

To justify conviction for an attempt to commit an assault with intent to rape, the jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to have sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix against her will, by force or by putting her in fear. Intent is a question for the jury to determine from the facts and circumstances, and if the evidence permits an inference that at the time of the attempt the defendant intended to gratify his lustful desires against the female's resistance, the case is for the jury. If any facts are proven from which the jury may reasonably infer that the crime has been committed, proof of a confession is admissible; and absent a specific objection that the corpus delicti was not sufficiently proven, that point is not preserved for review.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Late one evening in Mobile, Dana Holt left a corner cafe and walked home alone. Trent Walker stepped out from a parked van, followed a few feet behind her for two blocks, hid briefly behind a utility box when she stopped on a porch, then resumed trailing her until he turned away when a neighbor came outside. After arrest, Trent told officers he planned to drag Dana behind a storage shed and have sex with her even if she resisted.

If Trent moves for a directed verdict on the ground that he never actually touched Dana, how should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority rule is that an attempt to commit an assault with intent to rape is an attempt to rape that has not proceeded far enough to amount to an assault. The State must produce evidence from which the jury may find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended sexual intercourse against the woman's will, by force or by putting her in fear. Here, close pursuit, concealment, waiting, and Trent's statement of planned forcible intercourse create a jury question even without physical contact.