State v. Flynn

• Decision Date: 16 December 1915
• Docket Number: No. 30448.,30448.
• Citation: 175 Iowa 604,155 N.W. 254
• Parties: STATE v. FLYNN.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

175 Iowa 604

155 N.W. 254

STATE

v.FLYNN.

No. 30448.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Dec. 16, 1915.

Appeal from District Court, Webster County; R. M. Wright, Judge.

The defendant appeals from a conviction upon charge of keeping a house of ill fame. The material facts are stated in the opinion. Affirmed.

Weaver, J., dissenting in part.Ernest S. Cary, of Minneapolis, and Oliver Gordon, of Forest City, for appellant.

George Cosson, Atty. Gen., and John Fletcher, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

WEAVER, J.

[1][2][3] I. The argument on part of appellant is first directed to the question whether there is any substantial evidence of the truth of the charge made in the indictment. That it was a house of bad reputation in this respect among the people in its vicinity is abundantly shown by the testimony of many witnesses, and in so far as this testimony was disputed the question so raised was for the jury. That it was resorted to for the purpose of prostitution and lewdness is also shown by the testimony of witnesses, whose credibility was also for the jury. It may be true that no witness testifies to acts of illicit carnal intercourse there, but such evidence is not indispensable to sustain a conviction. State v. Toombs, 79 Iowa, 741, 45 N. W. 300;State v. Porter, 130 Iowa, 690, 107 N. W. 923;Peabody v. State, 72 Miss. 104, 17 South. 213;Graeter v. State, 105 Ind. 271, 4 N. E. 461-464. Ordinarily witnesses cannot be found who will publish their own shame by giving evidence of their participation in such acts, while the very nature of such association implies so much of darkness and secrecy that the enforcement of the law cannot often be accomplished, except by the production of convincing circumstantial evidence. This is usually done by showing the immoral character of the persons who live at or resort to the place, the more or less open and indecent familiarities indulged in there between the sexes, the libidinous tone of conversation, and the numerousother manifestations of the want of decent restraint which to common observation quite unmistakeably marks the home or place of sexual vice. It is unnecessary that we mar the pages of our Reports by setting out in detail the various acts, habits, and customs of the inhabitants and frequenters of the appellant's building as depicted by the state's evidence. It is enough to say that the testimony is such that, if believed by the jury, no other conclusion than that the house was resorted to for the purposes of prostitution and lewdness could have been reached.

[4] II. Error is assigned and...