State v. Fairweather
| Decision Date | 06 March 1923 |
| Docket Number | 35091 |
| Citation | 192 N.W. 266,195 Iowa 437 |
| Parties | STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, v. DAVID FAIRWEATHER, Appellant |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Black Hawk District Court.--GEORGE W. WOOD, Judge.
Affirmed.
John H Meyers, for appellant.
Ben J Gibson, Attorney-general, and B. J. Flick, Assistant Attorney-general, for appellee.
THE Opinion sufficiently states the case.--Affirmed.
The defendant was indicted upon the charge of maintaining a gambling nuisance. On arraignment, he entered a plea of not guilty, which he later withdrew, and entered a plea of guilty. Thereafter, he appeared in person and by counsel, was given opportunity to show cause, if any he had, why judgment should not be pronounced upon his plea of guilty, and failed so to do; and the court ordered and adjudged that he be committed to the jail of said county for a term of nine months, and pay the costs of prosecution. From this judgment the defendant appeals, on the following grounds: (1) That the judgment is indefinite, uncertain, and void, in that it does not fix "the time when the sentence is to commence or when it shall expire;" (2) that there is no finding or judicial determination of defendant's guilt; (3) that the court entered judgment as upon a plea of guilty of a liquor nuisance, when the charge on which he was arraigned was for keeping a gambling house; and (4) that the punishment assessed against him is excessive.
There is no merit in the objection to the judgment for want of definite statement of the beginning and end of the term of imprisonment. It is definitely stated that the defendant shall be committed to jail for a term of nine months, and in the absence of other order or judgment, this necessarily means nine months--neither more nor less--from the date of its entry, or at least from the date when the mittimus is served, and he submits to the execution of the sentence. The further point that the court, in making entry of the plea of guilty, or in entering judgment thereon, made use of the phrase "liquor nuisance," loses its force by the showing made in the amended abstract that the record was duly corrected in the presence of defendant and his counsel, and made to show the fact that the plea of guilty was entered to the indictment for maintaining a gambling nuisance.
The exception upon which principal stress is laid...
To continue reading
Request your trial