State v. Clark

• Decision Date: 16 October 1889
• Citation: 78 Iowa 492,43 N.W. 273
• Parties: STATE v. CLARK.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

78 Iowa 492

43 N.W. 273

STATE

v.CLARK.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 16, 1889.

Appeal from district court, Boone county; S. M. WEAVER, Judge.

Defendant was indicted and convicted of keeping a house of ill fame. He appeals to this court.E. L. Green, for appellant.

J. Y. Stone, Atty. Gen., and O. M. Brackett, Co. Atty., for the State.

BECK, J.

1. The defendant was indicted under Code, § 4013, being charged with willfully keeping a house of ill fame, resorted to for the purpose of prostitution and lewdness. Counsel for defendant first complain that the court did not in proper instructions define the crime for which defendant was indicted. It is the duty of the court to explain to the jury the offense of which the accused is charged, what acts constitute it, and explain or define the words used in the statute prescribing the offense. This may be done, as it often is, by what is called a “definition of the crime.” In doing this the court is said “to define the offense.” What is here described may be done in language and in a form different from a formal definition of the offense. If the court informs the jury with sufficient fullness and accuracy what acts constitute the offense, it seems to us that nothing more could be done by a formal definition. The jury were directed, in effect, that if they found defendant kept a house of ill fame within the county, and within three years next preceding the finding of the indictment, which was, while so kept by defendant, a house of ill fame, of bad repute, or evil notoriety, which was resorted to for the purpose of prostitution or lewdness, they should find him guilty of the crime charged in the indictment. The instructions direct that to convict defendant the jury must find that the house was kept by defendant with the knowledge of the prostitution and lewdness, and consent thereto, and that one or more acts of prostitution or lewdness do not constitute the crime. Other directions were given as to the matter which should be shown by the evidence to authorize conviction. In our opinion, the instructions, considered together, did fairly and clearly present to the jury the facts which they should find in order to convict, and in this regard the offense was defined to the jury.

2. Counsel, if we understand him correctly, thinks that prostitution consists in sexual commerce for gain. It is sometimes so defined, but we think if a woman submits to indiscriminate sexual intercourse, which she invites or...