{
  "id": 8718895,
  "name": "Geraldine INMAN v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Inman v. State",
  "decision_date": "1973-10-01",
  "docket_number": "CR 73-79",
  "first_page": "197",
  "last_page": "198",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "255 Ark. 197"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "500 S.W.2d 82"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "255 Ark. 181",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8718776
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/255/0181-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "161 S.W. 1049",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "year": 1913,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "110 Ark. 318",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1337059
      ],
      "year": 1913,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/110/0318-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 191,
    "char_count": 2087,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.869,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2084982560759334
    },
    "sha256": "7d004d94cd4eefb6564f5839d1a65e90980ec7929ec20ae7b4603cb50dfc21f0",
    "simhash": "1:122d6ecc389210e9",
    "word_count": 345
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:24:11.540726+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Byrd, j., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "Geraldine INMAN v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Frank Holt, Justice.\nThe jury convicted appellant of pandering [Ark. Stat. Ann. \u00a7 41-3208 (Repl. 1964)] and assessed her punishment at four years in the State Department of Corrections. Appellant first contends for reversal of the judgment that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict.\nThe state\u2019s principal witness testified that she was a prostitute and had previously worked for the appellant. This witness stated that she called the appellant who told her that \u201ceverybody had been asking about me. . .\u201d and \u201cshe asked me if I wanted to come back to work and I told her yes.\u201d The appellant told her she could make good money if she would work again. She then worked for the appellant as a prostitute at appellant\u2019s house and houseboat moored at the Arkansas Yacht Club. The appellant set the terms at a 60/40 fee splitting arrangement and also determined the price to be charged to the customers. In addition to providing the premises, the appellant furnished certain items, transportation back and forth from her house to her houseboat, and told the witness when to call the next day. Two other witnesses, who admitted they were prostitutes before working for appellant, testified that they also had worked for the appellant during the same year at her house and houseboat.\nThis evidence is amply substantial to support the jury\u2019s findings that the appellant procured, enticed and encouraged a female to remain a prostitute in violation of \u00a7 41-3208. By the comprehensive provisions of this statute, it is immaterial whether the female is virtuous or whether she consented to become or remain a prostitute. Boyle v. State, 110 Ark. 318, 161 S.W. 1049 (1913).\nOther contentions for reversal were considered and determined adversely today in Morgan v. State, 255 Ark. 181, 500 S.W. 2d 83.\nAffirmed.\nByrd, j., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Frank Holt, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Harold L. Hall, for appellant.",
      "Jim Guy Tucker, Atty. Gen., by: O. H. Hargraves, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Geraldine INMAN v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 73-79\n500 S.W. 2d 82\nOpinion delivered October 1, 1973\n[Rehearing denied November 5, 1973.]\nHarold L. Hall, for appellant.\nJim Guy Tucker, Atty. Gen., by: O. H. Hargraves, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0197-01",
  "first_page_order": 219,
  "last_page_order": 220
}