State v. Frost

• Decision Date: 05 October 1895
• Citation: 95 Iowa 448,64 N.W. 401
• Parties: STATE v. FROST.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

95 Iowa 448

64 N.W. 401

STATE

v.FROST.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 5, 1895.

Appeal from district court, Audubon county; W. R. Greene, Judge.

The defendant was indicted for breaking and entering a warehouse with intent to commit the crime of larceny. There was a trial by jury, verdict of guilty, and judgment on the verdict. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.H. W. Hanna and J. M. Graham, for appellant.

Milton Remley, Atty. Gen., for the State.

ROTHROCK, J.

The appeal is submitted to this court upon a typewritten transcript of the indictment, with the names of the witnesses examined before the grand jury indorsed thereon. It appears that the defendant was absent when the grand jury was impaneled and the indictment returned. He had escaped from jail, “and fled the country.” After the indictment was returned, he was captured, and pleaded not guilty. Afterwards he withdrew his plea, and moved to set aside the indictment. The transcript does not show the grounds of the motion to set aside the indictment. It is stated in argument that it was because the defendant's wife was examined as a witness before the grand jury. It is questionable whether the fact that the wife of a party charged with a criminal offense was examined as a witness before the grand jury is a cause for setting aside or quashing the indictment. It does not appear among the causes enumerated in section 4337 of the Code. But, whether an attack may be made on an indictment on this ground or not, it does not appear from the record what the wife of the defendant testified to before the grand jury; and, for aught that does appear, she may have been there at the instance of the defendant.

2. It appears from the transcript that the defendant requested the court to have the testimony of the witnesses examined on the trial taken in shorthand, and made of record. The transcript as to this request is as follows: “Defendant asks that the testimony be reported; and, it not satisfactorily appearing to the court that the interest of either the state or the defendant required that the testimony given in this case be taken down in shorthand by the official reporter, his services are dispensed with.” The direction to have the testimony reported by an official reporter is discretionary with the court. In section 227 of McClain's Code it is provided that the judge shall not direct the evidence so taken to be so taken “in any criminal case, unless it shall satisfactorily appear to him that the...