State v. Fagan, No. 54747
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Iowa |
| Writing for the Court | UHLENHOPP |
| Citation | 190 N.W.2d 800 |
| Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Frederick Winslow FAGAN, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 13 October 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 54747 |
Page 800
v.
Frederick Winslow FAGAN, Appellant.
Russell Henry, Jewell, for appellant.
Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., James W. Hughes, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Carrol Wood, County Atty., Webster City, for appellee.
UHLENHOPP, Justice.
This appeal mainly relates to waiver of a jury in a criminal trial for a felony. The matter of entrapment is also involved.
One Vicki Rudolph was employed by agents of the Iowa Bureau of Criminal Investigation. The State claims that while Miss Rudolph was so employed, she bought eight LSD capsules from defendant for $23.
Defendant was charged with the felony of selling hallucinogenic drugs in violation of § 204A.3, Code, 1971. He pleaded not guilty. At the opening of the trial he moved the trial court to try the case without a jury. The State consented. The trial court denied the motion of the ground that indictable offenses cannot be tried to the court. The case was tried to a jury, which convicted defendant. He was sentenced and appealed the case to us.
Three legal questions must be determined: (1) Whether the case could be tried to the court without a jury, (2) Whether the trial court correctly instructed the jury on entrapment, and (3) Whether proper forms of verdict were submitted to the jury.
I. Waiver of Jury. Article I of the Iowa Constitution contains these clauses:
§ 9. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate; but the General Assembly may authorize trial by a jury of a less number than twelve men in inferior courts; but no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
§ 10. In all criminal prosecutions, and in cases involving the life, or liberty of an individual the accused shall have a
Page 801
right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury; to be informed of the accusation against him, to have a copy of the same when demanded; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for his witnesses; and, to have the assistance of counsel.Our constitution also contains this clause in Article V, which establishes the judicial system:
§ 14. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to provide for the carrying into effect of this article, And to provide for a general system of practice in all the Courts of this State. (Italics added.)
Pursuant to the latter clause, the legislature provided a general system of criminal practice which comprises Title XXXVI of the Code, 1971. Sections 777.16 and 780.23 of that title relate to the manner in which prosecutions on indictment are to be tried. Section 777.16 of the 1971 Code provides:
An issue of fact arises on a plea of not guilty or of former conviction or acquittal, and no further pleading is necessary. Issues of fact must be tried by a jury. (Italics added.)
Section 780.23 provides:
On the trial of an indictment for any other offense than libel, questions of law are to be decided by the court, saving the right of the defendant and the state to except; Questions of facts are to be tried by jury. (Italics added.)
Under these constitutional and statutory clauses, this court has held since 1884 just as the trial court ruled here--that prosecutions for indictable crimes cannot be tried without a jury. State v. Carman, 63 Iowa 130, 131, 18 N.W. 691 ('The question presented is not as to the waiver of a mere statutory privilege, but an imperative provision, based, as we view it, upon the soundest conception of public policy.'); State v. Larrigan, 66 Iowa 426, 23 N.W. 907; State v. Tucker, 96 Iowa 276, 65 N.W. 152; State v. Douglass, 96 Iowa 308, 65 N.W. 151; State v. Lightfoot, 107 Iowa 344, 78 N.W. 41 (dictum); State v. Rea, 126 Iowa 65, 101 N.W. 507; State v. Williams, 195 Iowa 374, 191 N.W. 790; State v. Stricker, 196 Iowa 290, 194 N.W. 60; State v. Sereg, 229 Iowa 1105, 296 N.W. 231 (full consideration of question by Judge Bliss); State v. Pilcher, 171 N.W.2d 251 (Iowa).
The rule prohibiting nonjury trial applies even though the prosecutor and the defendant agree upon such a trial. State v. Rea, supra; State v. Tucker, supra. The rule is not founded upon the inability of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Mullen, No. 55519
...test the United States Supreme Court later adopted in Sorrells. While we generally approved the uniform instruction in State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800, 802 (Iowa 1971), the sentence above underlined and related sentences employing the same language were not in issue. Unlike the Russell court......
-
State v. Buchanan, No. 55573
...as an additional element in its case. See, E.g., State v. Ebelsheiser, 242 Iowa 49, 43 N.W.2d 706 (1950) (self-defense); State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800 (Iowa 1971) (entrapment). The reason for requiring the State to negative these defenses as additional elements in its proof is rooted in th......
-
Hinkle v. State, No. 63313
...decided on common law and not constitutional grounds. See State v. Thomas, 219 N.W.2d 3, 5 (Iowa 1974) (insanity); State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800, 802 (Iowa 1971) (entrapment); State v. Ebelsheiser, 242 Iowa 49, 58, 43 N.W.2d 706, 712 (1950) (self-defense). There is nothing in our case law ......
-
State v. Henderson, No. 60337
...therefor. This court has held that under the cited statute verdicts of the kind this trial court submitted are proper. State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800 But defendant contends that failure to submit the verdict of "Not guilty by reason of self defense" deprived him of a fair trial and therefor......
-
State v. Mullen, No. 55519
...test the United States Supreme Court later adopted in Sorrells. While we generally approved the uniform instruction in State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800, 802 (Iowa 1971), the sentence above underlined and related sentences employing the same language were not in issue. Unlike the Russell court......
-
State v. Buchanan, No. 55573
...as an additional element in its case. See, E.g., State v. Ebelsheiser, 242 Iowa 49, 43 N.W.2d 706 (1950) (self-defense); State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800 (Iowa 1971) (entrapment). The reason for requiring the State to negative these defenses as additional elements in its proof is rooted in th......
-
Hinkle v. State, No. 63313
...decided on common law and not constitutional grounds. See State v. Thomas, 219 N.W.2d 3, 5 (Iowa 1974) (insanity); State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800, 802 (Iowa 1971) (entrapment); State v. Ebelsheiser, 242 Iowa 49, 58, 43 N.W.2d 706, 712 (1950) (self-defense). There is nothing in our case law ......
-
State v. Henderson, No. 60337
...therefor. This court has held that under the cited statute verdicts of the kind this trial court submitted are proper. State v. Fagan, 190 N.W.2d 800 But defendant contends that failure to submit the verdict of "Not guilty by reason of self defense" deprived him of a fair trial and therefor......