State v. Kirkman, No. 39090.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtFAVILLE
Citation220 N.W. 57,206 Iowa 364
PartiesSTATE v. KIRKMAN.
Docket NumberNo. 39090.
Decision Date26 June 1928

206 Iowa 364
220 N.W. 57

STATE
v.
KIRKMAN.

No. 39090.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

June 26, 1928.


Appeal from District Court, Mahaska County; Frank Bechly, Judge.

Defendant was indicted for the crime of having possession of intoxicating liquor. The trial court sustained the defendant's motion for a directed verdict, and the State appeals. Reversed.

[220 N.W. 57]

John Fletcher, Atty. Gen., and Blanchard W. Preston, Co. Atty., of Oskaloosa, for the State.

David S. David, of Oskaloosa, for appellee.


FAVILLE, J.

The undisputed evidence shows that officers, late at night or early in the morning, approached an automobile in which the defendant was sitting. When discovered, defendant threw a bottle containing intoxicating liquor out of the said automobile, and the same lodged on the ground near the car. It did not break, and was seized by the officers. The defendant is charged under section 1924 with having possession of intoxicating liquor. Said section 1924, among other things, provides that no person shall “have possession of any intoxicating liquor, except as provided in this title.” There was no charge of transporting intoxicating liquor, and it is immaterial whether the defendant was driving the automobile or not. By Code, § 1966a3 an attempt to destroy liquid by any person while in the presence of peace officers shall be prima facie evidence that “such liquid is intoxicating liquor and intended for unlawful purposes.” Under the statute (Code, § 1966a2) certain defenses are available to one having possession of intoxicating liquor. No evidence was offered in behalf of defendant. The evidence in the case was sufficient to carry to the jury the question as

[220 N.W. 58]

to whether or not the defendant was guilty of the crime charged. Ordinarily we do not review a criminal case where there is a directed verdict predicated solely on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence. State v. Gilbert, 138 Iowa, 335, 116 N. W. 142. The motion in the instant case, however, was broader than this. The evidence was sufficient to establish the corpus delicti and carry the case to the jury. See State v. Kelley, 193 Iowa, 62, 186 N. W. 834, and cases cited. The court erred in sustaining the motion.

The cause cannot be retried, and no order of remand will be entered. The order of the district court, however, must be and it is reversed.

STEVENS, C. J., and EVANS, KINDIG, and ALBERT, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • State v. Traas, No. 45565.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 17, 1941
    ...v. Gilbert, 138 Iowa 335, 116 N.W. 142;State v. Keeler, 28 Iowa 551;State v. Johnson, 157 Iowa 248, 138 N.W. 458;State v. Kirkman, 206 Iowa 364, 220 N.W. 57;State v. Woodruff, 208 Iowa 236, 225 N.W. 254;State v. Meyer, 203 Iowa 694, 213 N.W. 220;State v. Dietz, 162 Iowa 332, 143 N.W. 1080. ......
  • Iowa v. Buckley, No. 1--56537
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • August 29, 1975
    ...862 (1941); State v. Woodruff, 208 Iowa 236, 225 N.W. 254 (1929); State v. Patton, 206 Iowa 1347, 221 N.W. 952 (1928); State v. Kirkman, 206 Iowa 364, 220 N.W. 57 (1928); State v. Meyer, 203 Iowa 694, 213 N.W. 220 (1927); State v. Bailey, 202 Iowa 146, 209 N.W. 403 (1926); State v. Dietz, 1......
  • Amick v. Montross, No. 38507.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 26, 1928
    ...him and he will be nothing but a laboring man.” This answer was subsequently excluded on the appellee's motion. The appellant complains [220 N.W. 57]of this ruling of the court. It will be observed that, as to the specific rumors concerning which inquiry was made on cross-examination, the w......
3 cases
  • State v. Traas, No. 45565.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 17, 1941
    ...v. Gilbert, 138 Iowa 335, 116 N.W. 142;State v. Keeler, 28 Iowa 551;State v. Johnson, 157 Iowa 248, 138 N.W. 458;State v. Kirkman, 206 Iowa 364, 220 N.W. 57;State v. Woodruff, 208 Iowa 236, 225 N.W. 254;State v. Meyer, 203 Iowa 694, 213 N.W. 220;State v. Dietz, 162 Iowa 332, 143 N.W. 1080. ......
  • Iowa v. Buckley, No. 1--56537
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • August 29, 1975
    ...862 (1941); State v. Woodruff, 208 Iowa 236, 225 N.W. 254 (1929); State v. Patton, 206 Iowa 1347, 221 N.W. 952 (1928); State v. Kirkman, 206 Iowa 364, 220 N.W. 57 (1928); State v. Meyer, 203 Iowa 694, 213 N.W. 220 (1927); State v. Bailey, 202 Iowa 146, 209 N.W. 403 (1926); State v. Dietz, 1......
  • Amick v. Montross, No. 38507.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 26, 1928
    ...him and he will be nothing but a laboring man.” This answer was subsequently excluded on the appellee's motion. The appellant complains [220 N.W. 57]of this ruling of the court. It will be observed that, as to the specific rumors concerning which inquiry was made on cross-examination, the w......

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