State v. Friend

• Citation: 239 N.W. 132,213 Iowa 544
• Decision Date: 24 November 1931
• Docket Number: No. 40944.,40944.
• Parties: STATE v. FRIEND.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Iowa

213 Iowa 544

239 N.W. 132

STATE

v.FRIEND.

No. 40944.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Nov. 24, 1931.

Appeal from District Court, Floyd County; M. H. Kepler, Judge.

The defendant was tried on a true information charging him with assault with intent to commit rape. The court directed a verdict for the defendant. The state appeals. The facts appear in the opinion.

Affirmed.E. C. Hardwig, Co. Atty., and J. C. Campbell, both of Charles City, for the State.

Jens Grothe, of Charles City, for appellee.

GRIMM, J.

In September, 1930, the county attorney of Floyd county filed a true information against the defendant, charging him with assault with intent to commit rape. The defendant pleaded not guilty. At the close of the evidence for the state, the defendant filed a motion for a directed verdict, and the court reserved the ruling. At the close of all the evidence, the motion to direct a verdict in behalf of the defendant was renewed and sustained, and it is from this ruling that the state has appealed.

I. The law applicable to such cases has been recently very fully announced by this court in State v. Little, 210 Iowa, 371, 228 N. W. 67, 69. What has been there said need not be here repeated, except to say that: “The purpose of section 14012 can hardly be misunderstood. It is to secure review by the higher court of erroneous rulings by the district court on questions of law which may be of use to the court and the profession in the administration of the criminal law. As is illustrated by many cases cited from this and other jurisdictions, questions of law which affect the state adversely and go directly to the proper administration of the criminal law may, of course, arise. When they do and the question is one in which an appeal is permitted, the court must pass upon it and announce the rule by which trial courts are in the future to be guided. Nothing could be more useless than appeals by the state from rulings directing yerdicts of acquittal unless a question of law other than the mere sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction is involved. The ruling of the court below directing the jury to return a verdict of not guilty does not present a question of law which this court is required to review.”

In State v. Niehaus, 209 Iowa, 533, 228 N. W. 308, 310, in a case in which the court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant, this court said: “All of these grounds go to the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant the court in...