State v. Jellema, 54923

Citation206 N.W.2d 679
Decision Date25 April 1973
Docket NumberNo. 54923,54923
PartiesSTATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Bruce J. JELLEMA, Appellant.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa

Orville A. Hames, Remsen, for appellant.

Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., Fred M. Haskins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert R. Huibregtse, County Atty., for appellee.

Heard before MOORE, C.J., and MASON, LeGRAND, UHLENHOPP and McCORMICK, JJ.

MASON, Justice.

A Sioux County grand jury returned an indictment which, as amended, charged Bruce J. Jellema with breaking and entering with intent to commit a public offense, to wit: larceny contrary to section 708.8, The Code. Defendant entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment. The matter proceeded to trial by jury. Defendant's motion for directed verdict made at the close of the State's evidence and renewed at the close of all evidence was overruled and the matter was submitted to the jury which convicted him of the crime charged. He appeals from the judgment imposing sentence on this conviction.

Defendant's assignments of error relied on for reversal relate to the court's ruling permitting witnesses whose names were not endorsed on the indictment to testify as State's witnesses in its case in chief; admission into evidence of a blackboard used by witnesses in demonstrating their testimony to the jury; failure to sustain defendant's motion for opportunity to examine a police report referred to by a State's witness in his testimony; and insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.

The incident giving rise to this prosecution occurred December 12, 1970. About 2:30 a.m. that morning Chief William Starkenburg of the Alton police department examined the windows and doors of Foreman's Tire Service while on routine patrol. The building was found secure. Only a few minutes later as he was continuing his patrol he observed defendant two blocks north of the tire service, waved to him and drove on to the post office to obtain a newspaper. Approximately ten to twelve minutes later defendant approached Starkenburg. He told Starkenburg he had witnessed a man running away from Foreman's Tire Service in a westerly direction along South County Road.

Both men then returned to the tire service. A check of the premises revealed a window of the rear door had ben broken. Starkenburg immediately radioed the Sioux County sheriff, Ted Hoogland. Upon receiving the call at about 3:00 a.m., Hoogland telephoned his depouty, Larry Zeutenhorst and instructed him to assist Starkenburg in an investigation of the apparent crime. After notifying Hoogland, defendant and Starkenburg went to Foreman's home and advised him there had been a break in at his store. Starkenburg then returned to the tire service while Foreman drove defendant to his home before proceeding to the station.

There, Starkenburg, Hoogland and Zeutenhorst discovered one set of footprints leading to and from a second window through which the building had been entered. Although the footprints were intermittent and often incomplete, the men traced the prints pointing toward the tire service to the curb in front of defendant's home. The footprints of one walking away from the window were lost about three blocks north of the building and 150 feet to the west of defendant's home.

Defendant was then awakened by sheriff Hoogland and at his request directed Hoogland and Zeutenhorst to the place where he stood when he noticed someone running away from Foreman's Tire Service. With the aid of flashlights, the men surveyed the street in close proximity to the tire service and west of the tire service on South County Road but found no footprints similar to those discovered near the window.

Deputy sheriff Zeutenhorst testified the footprints pointing toward the tire service were traced from the rear of the building, where the snow was six to eight inches in depth, to the curb in front of defendant's home. He stated the footprints were distinguishable because a layer of snow and frost covered the streets, which he said had been plowed after the last snowfall. But since the sidewalk adjacent to defendant's home had been shoveled the footprints could not be followed from the curb to defendant's doorstep. He indicated the men made no effort to trace the set of footprints in any direction beyond the Jellema house. Zeutenhorst described the footprints as those of 'a cowboy boot or a mod style shoe' about 11--11 1/2 inches in length, characterized by 'a deep heel and the pointed toe.' No impressions, photographs or measurements with a scaled instrument were taken of the footprints.

After some investigation the officers and defendant went to the Alton city hall. There defendant was asked by the sheriff if he had changed shoes. He said he had. Jellema testified he wore a 9 1/2 shoe and that when he saw someone running from behind Foreman's Tire Service he was wearing a pair of 'suede saddle shoes.' Zeutenhorst testified they did not attempt to determine whether defendant possessed a pair of boots or shoes that would match the footprints that were traced to his home.

Similar testimony was presented by sheriff Hoogland who testified that 'slight' frost enabled them to trace the footprints leading to and from the windows through which entry into Foreman's Tire Service was gained. He stated the impressions were either of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • State v. Hall
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • November 12, 1975
    ...268 (Iowa 1975); State v. White, 223 N.W.2d 163, 164 (Iowa 1974); State v. Sellers, 215 N.W.2d 231, 232 (Iowa 1974); State v. Jellema, 206 N.W.2d 679, 681 (Iowa 1973); State v. Schurman, 205 N.W.2d 732, 733--734 (Iowa Several rules have been consistently adhered to in considering such motio......
  • State v. Lewis
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • May 19, 1976
    ...innocence and so convincing as to exclude a reasonable doubt that defendant was guilty of the offense charged.' State v. Jellema, 206 N.W.2d 679, 681 (Iowa 1973). It is evident each case will be considered in light of its own peculiar factual setting in making the determination whether the ......
  • State v. Wilson, 12944
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • November 20, 1980
    ...defendant's pickup. Finally, because it is necessary to consider only the supporting evidence whether contradicted or not, State v. Jellema, 206 N.W.2d 679 (Iowa 1973), the jury could easily have chosen to disbelieve defendant's alibi story of rabbit hunting in its entirety, especially in l......
  • State v. Kennedy
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1974
    ...innocence and so convincing as to exclude a reasonable doubt that defendant was innocent of the offense charged. State v. Jellema, 206 N.W.2d 679, 681 (Iowa 1973); State v. Williams, 179 N.W.2d 756, 760 (Iowa 1970); State v. DeRaad, 164 N.W.2d 108, 110 (Iowa II. Turning to the situation Sub......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT