State v. Brown, No. 53356
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
| Writing for the Court | RAWLINGS |
| Citation | 168 N.W.2d 922 |
| Decision Date | 10 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 53356 |
| Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Leroy BROWN, Appellant. |
Page 922
v.
Leroy BROWN, Appellant.
Virgil Moore, Des Moines, for appellant.
Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., Larry Seckington, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Mike Hansen, Asst. County Atty., for appellee.
RAWLINGS, Justice.
Defendant, charged with assault and battery, entered a not guilty plea, was tried, found guilty, and sentenced. He appeals. We affirm.
The record discloses defendant's younger brother, Raymond Brown, with some friends, most or all of whom were minors, went to a house in Des Moines for 'a party'. It also reveals beer was consumed by everyone present. Two of the boys became involved in an altercation. From this point on the evidence is largely in conflict.
Witnesses for the State testified the original fight ceased and the boys left the
Page 923
premises but returned about a half hour later, accompanied by defendant. The latter became belligerent toward one Norman Bresley, the property owner's brother-in-law, and another fight occurred. Defendant then struck Bresley on the arm and head with a club or hard instrument, causing him some bodily injury requiring medical attention.Evidence on behalf of defendant is to the effect Raymond was involved in an affray at the party. One of his friends went to a nearby public phone booth, contacted defendant, and reported the incident. Soon thereafter the latter arrived at the scene of the conflict. His brother and some others were then in a car preparing to leave. Defendant got out of his automobile. He was joined by Raymond and associates. One of defendant's witnesses testified to the effect Tim Bresley struck at defendant. Defendant said, while getting from his car, Norman Bresley took a swing at him and he struck back. Defendant also stated his sole purpose in going to the place of trouble was to retrieve the younger brother.
Presented with these facts, trial court found defendant guilty. On appeal he contends, (1) evidence appellant used force other than reasonable in defense of himself and others is insufficient, (2) the court erred in failing to inform him, prior to hearing, he was entitled to trial by jury, unless waived. These assignments will be dealt with in reverse order.
I. As best we can determine, defendant claims the court failed to inform him the offense charged was premised upon the violation of a state law, permitting a jury trial. See Code sections 602.28 and 762.15.
No motion for new trial was filed. In fact this is the first time any jury trial claim has been presented.
Ordinarily issues not raised in the trial court will not be entertained on appeal. See State v. McClelland, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d 189, 197. Upon that basis we do not pass on this issue.
II. Invoking the self-defense doctrine, defendant contends the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Mayhew, No. 53169
...157 N.W.2d 907, 909--910 and citations. See also State v. McClelland, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d 189, 197 and citations; State v. Brown, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923; Carlson v. Manughmer, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 802, We are not persuaded it was error to overrule the motion to suppress on the grounds there ass......
-
State v. Brown, No. 53046
...therein. State v. McClelland, supra, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d at 197; State v. Harty, Iowa, 167 N.W.2d 665, 667; and State v. Brown, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923, and authorities cited in these opinions hold contentions raised for the first time at this late stage in the proceedings present no questio......
-
State v. Orozco, No. 54855
...182 N.W.2d 390, 392--393 (Iowa). Under these circumstances no issue in that regard is now presented for review. See State v. Brown, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923 (Iowa), cited with applicable authorities in State v. Brown, 172 N.W.2d 152, 159 In light of the foregoing we find no reversible error with......
-
State v. Louwrens, No. 08-1862.
...suggests the officers made no mistake of law. This issue was waived because it was not presented in the district court. State v. Brown, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923 (Iowa 1969) ("Ordinarily issues not raised in the trial court will not be entertained on appeal."); see also Field v. Palmer, 592 N.W.2......
-
State v. Mayhew, No. 53169
...157 N.W.2d 907, 909--910 and citations. See also State v. McClelland, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d 189, 197 and citations; State v. Brown, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923; Carlson v. Manughmer, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 802, We are not persuaded it was error to overrule the motion to suppress on the grounds there ass......
-
State v. Brown, No. 53046
...therein. State v. McClelland, supra, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d at 197; State v. Harty, Iowa, 167 N.W.2d 665, 667; and State v. Brown, Iowa, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923, and authorities cited in these opinions hold contentions raised for the first time at this late stage in the proceedings present no questio......
-
State v. Orozco, No. 54855
...182 N.W.2d 390, 392--393 (Iowa). Under these circumstances no issue in that regard is now presented for review. See State v. Brown, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923 (Iowa), cited with applicable authorities in State v. Brown, 172 N.W.2d 152, 159 In light of the foregoing we find no reversible error with......
-
State v. Louwrens, No. 08-1862.
...suggests the officers made no mistake of law. This issue was waived because it was not presented in the district court. State v. Brown, 168 N.W.2d 922, 923 (Iowa 1969) ("Ordinarily issues not raised in the trial court will not be entertained on appeal."); see also Field v. Palmer, 592 N.W.2......