State v. Coil
Decision Date | 22 March 1978 |
Docket Number | No. 60339,60339 |
Citation | 264 N.W.2d 293 |
Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Edward R. COIL, Appellant. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
John Gerken, of Cudahy Law Firm, Jefferson, for appellant.
Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., Joseph Beck and Faison Sessoms, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Nicola Martino, Greene County Atty., for appellee.
Considered by MOORE, C. J., and MASON, RAWLINGS, LeGRAND and REYNOLDSON, JJ.
A jury found defendant guilty of assaulting a thirteen-year-old girl with intent to commit rape in violation of § 698.4, The Code, 1975. He was sentenced to serve a term of not more than ten years in the men's reformatory, a judgment from which he appeals. We affirm.
Defendant raises two issues on this appeal as follows:
1. He asserts § 698.4 is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
2. He claims he was denied effective counsel.
I. Right of Privacy
The statute under which defendant was convicted makes it a crime to "assault a female with intent to commit a rape." As material to this case, rape is defined in § 698.1, The Code, as follows:
"If any person ravish and carnally know any female by force or against her will, or if any person carnally know and abuse any female child under the age of sixteen years, * * * he shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary for life, or any term of years, not less than five, and the court may pronounce sentence for a lesser period than the maximum, the provisions of the indeterminate sentence law to the contrary notwithstanding."
We have held assault with intent to commit rape includes an assault with intent to commit statutory rape, even though there may have been purported consent by the minor female partner. State v. Anderson, 222 N.W.2d 494, 495-96 (Iowa 1974).
Defendant's Constitutional challenge to the statute is on the narrow ground that it makes a consensual "assault," as well as a forcible one, a crime when a minor female is involved. More particularly, he asserts the trial court's instructions told the jury it could find defendant guilty even if the young girl consented to the assault upon her.
The state claims this issue was not properly preserved and should not be considered. While there may be some merit to this as far as the instruction is concerned, the same matter was raised by defendant's demurrer to the information. We hold it is properly before us.
Defendant relies strongly on Carey v. Population Services International et al., 431 U.S. 678, 97 S.Ct. 2010, 52 L.Ed.2d 675 (1977) and Planned Parenthood of Missouri v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 96 S.Ct. 2831, 49 L.Ed.2d 788 (1976).
These cases announce standards protecting the right to privacy. Generally they restrict the right of the state to unnecessarily interfere in personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education. See 431 U.S. at 684, 97 S.Ct. at 2016, 52 L.Ed.2d at 684.
By a five-to-four majority, we said in State v. Pilcher, 242 N.W.2d 348 (Iowa 1976) the state must demonstrate an interest which is "compelling and necessary" to accomplishing a permissible state policy before it may interfere in recognized areas of fundamental rights, among which we placed sexual relations performed in private between consenting adults of the opposite sex. Specifically excluded from our Pilcher holding was the matter of "adult corruption of children." See 242 N.W.2d at 359.
Likewise, in Carey and Planned Parenthood, the court made it clear sexual conduct involving minors is not to be judged by the same rules as those which govern adults.
In Carey the court said:
(431 U.S. at 692, 97 S.Ct. at 2020, 52 L.Ed.2d at 689-90.)
A concurring opinion in that same case contains this statement:
(431 U.S. at 705, 97 S.Ct. at 2027, 52 L.Ed.2d at 697-98.)
A further significant comment is found in Carey in this footnote at 431 U.S. at 693, 97 S.Ct. at 2021, 52 L.Ed.2d p. 690:
The Planned Parenthood case relied on by defendant contains similar statements relating to state regulation of sexual conduct by minors. We set out several of them here:
(428 U.S. at 74, 96 S.Ct. at 2843, 49 L.Ed.2d at 808). (Emphasis added.)
A concurring opinion in Planned Parenthood includes this:
(428 U.S. at 102, 96 S.Ct. at 2856, 49 L.Ed.2d at 823-24)
In State v. Drake, 219 N.W.2d 492, 495 (Iowa 1974) we held age is a proper factor to be considered in examining statutes relating to sexual behavior. There we cited with approval the following from In re Interest of J. D. G., a child under 17 years of age, 498 S.W.2d 786, 792 (Mo.1973):
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2, Matter of
...Supreme Court of Iowa has also held that the state has a significant interest in regulating sexual activity of minors. State v. Coil, 264 N.W.2d 293, 294-96 (Iowa 1978). The court noted that the state may legitimately fix the age at which minor females may consent to sexual intercourse or o......
-
State v. Williams
...See State v. Smith, 282 N.W.2d 138, 143-44 (Iowa 1979); State v. O'Connell, 275 N.W.2d 197, 205-06 (Iowa 1979); State v. Coil, 264 N.W.2d 293, 296 (Iowa 1978). See also State v. Barber, 301 So.2d 7, 9 (Fla.1974); State v. Bosler, 432 S.W.2d 237, 239 (Mo.1968); Commonwealth v. Wade, 480 Pa. ......
-
Amin v. State
...the record on a direct appeal is insufficient to allow us to adjudicate a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. State v. Coil, 264 N.W.2d 293, 296 (Iowa 1978). In such cases, it is preferable that the claim be litigated in postconviction proceedings, see State v. Williams, 285 N.W.2d ......
-
State v. O'Connell
...It therefore urges the issue should be reserved for determination in proceedings for postconviction relief. We agree. See State v. Coil, 264 N.W.2d 293, 296 (Iowa 1978); State v. Kellogg, 263 N.W.2d at We find no basis on the record before us to hold defendant's trial counsel did not perfor......