State v. Haberle

• Decision Date: 23 June 1887
• Citation: 33 N.W. 461,72 Iowa 138
• Parties: STATE v. HABERLE AND ANOTHER.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

72 Iowa 138

33 N.W. 461

STATE

v.HABERLE AND ANOTHER.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

June 23, 1887.

Appeal from district court, Mitchell county.

The defendants were convicted of the crime of keeping a house of ill fame, and they appeal.L. M. Ryce, for appellants.

A. J. Baker, Atty. Gen., for the State.

ROTHROCK, J.

It is provided by chapter 142 of the Laws of the Twentieth General Assembly that, “if any person keeps a house of ill fame resorted to for the purpose of prostitution or lewdness, such person shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not less than six months nor more than five years.” And section 4 of the act provides that “the state, upon the trial of any person indicted for keeping a house of ill fame, may, for the purpose of establishing the character of the house kept by the defendant, introduce evidence of the general reputation of the house so kept, and such evidence shall be competent for such purpose.” The court instructed the jury that “the burden is on the state to prove that the defendants kept the house in question, and that it was kept by them as a house of ill fame in fact, and by their procurement or permission it was resorted to for the purpose of prostitution or lewdness. For the purpose of establishing the character of the house kept by defendants, evidence of the general reputation of such house, as to reputation, is competent for the consideration of the jury as a circumstance in the case.”

It is claimed by counsel for appellants that this instruction is erroneous because section 4 of the act above cited, and upon which the instruction is based, is unconstitutional. It is said that such a law deprives the accused of property or liberty without due process of law, because he may be convicted of crime upon evidence of the mere reputation of the house kept by him. It will be observed that, under the statute, two propositions are necessary to be established in order to authorize a conviction for the crime: (1) That the house in question is a house of ill fame,--that is, that it is a house of bad repute or evil notoriety; and (2) that it is resorted to for the purpose of prostitution or lewdness. Under the statute in question it is competent to establish the first proposition by proof of the reputation or character of the house. The very fact required to be proved rests upon the character or reputation of the house. To establish the other required fact it is necessary to prove as a fact that the house is resorted to for the purpose of prostitution or lewdness.

The defendants' counsel cite the...