State v. Dolan

• Decision Date: 13 November 1906
• Citation: 109 N.W. 609,132 Iowa 196
• Parties: STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, v. EDWARD DOLAN, Appellant
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

109 N.W. 609

132 Iowa 196

STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, v. EDWARD DOLAN, Appellant

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

November 13, 1906

Appeal from Jackson District Court.-- HON. A. P. BARKER, Judge.

DEFENDANT was indicted, tried and convicted of the crime of seduction and from the judgment imposed, he appeals. Reversed.

Reversed.

Murray & Farr and M. J. Wade, for appellant.

Chas W. Mullan, Attorney General, and Lawrence De Graff, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

OPINION

DEEMER, J.

The trial court gave the following instruction: "(7) Evidence has been introduced in this case tending to show various degrees of intimacy of the prosecuting witness with other men than the defendant, especially with William Patterson and Henry Rodewal, prior to and about the time she claims to have been seduced by defendant, also tending to prove that she admitted being too free with said Patterson, all of which she now denies. The purpose of such testimony is: (1) To show that another than the defendant is or may be the father of her child, if she was with child, and so discredit her claim that the defendant seduced her. (2) To show the improbability of her claim that she and the defendant were in fact engaged to be married. You should give such evidence the consideration you deem it to merit for that purpose, bearing in mind, however, that the ultimate question for your determination is, not who was in reality the father of such child, but, rather, did defendant debauch and seduce her as hereinbefore explained, and, if so, was she, previous to the time of such seduction, of chaste character? Even should you be satisfied that another than defendant was the father of such child, you might convict defendant of seducing her, if you believed from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he first had intercourse with her by means of seductive arts of false promises as hereinafter explained; she being previously thereto of chaste character." This instruction was erroneous for the reason that such intimacy as is referred to should also be considered as bearing upon the previous chastity of the prosecuting witness.

In another instruction the court said: "Mere proof of opportunity, that she for a time was a member of his father's family and associated with him as such, or even of the birth of a child, are not alone sufficient corroboration, though they may be considered by you, in connection with other facts and circumstances established in the case, for that purpose." The rule in this state is that, while the birth of a child is evidence of seduction, it does not tend in any way to connect defendant with the act. State v. McGinn, 109 Iowa 641, 80 N.W. 1068; State v. Kissock, 111 Iowa 690, 83 N.W....