State v. Parkey, 55114

Citation200 N.W.2d 518
Decision Date19 September 1972
Docket NumberNo. 55114,55114
PartiesSTATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Russell Eugene PARKEY, Appellant.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa

Oscar E. Jones, Des Moines, for appellant.

Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., Allen J. Lukehart, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Ray Fenton, County Atty., for appellee.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant appeals from conviction and sentence for robbery with aggravation in violation of Code sections 711.1 and 711.2. We affirm.

About 1:45 p.m., March 27, 1971, two men entered Sargent's Restaurant in Des Moines. After some discussion in the presence of Mrs. William Sargent, the owner, they placed their orders for food. Several minutes thereafter one of the men demanded her money. The man whom she later identified as defendant Russell Eugene Parkey pointed a gun at her. They took money from the cash register and left. Mrs. Sargent immediately reported the robbery to the Des Moines police department. Her description of defendant included the fact he was wearing a cap with a large bill and an army jacket with the sleeves cut off. At the police station Mrs. Sargent saw defendant's photograph on a bulletin board and stated he was one of the men who had robbed her. She also picked defendant out of a lineup and identified him at trial. Defendant testified he did not own a gun and denied participation in the robbery. He admitted having owned such items of clothing as described by Mrs. Sargent.

Defendant contends the jury guilty verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. He asserts the trial court erred in overruling his motion for new trial.

Defendant concedes corroboration of a robbery identification witness is not required but argues his conviction based on Mrs. Sargent's testimony should not be allowed to stand.

The trial court is vested with considerable discretion in passing on a motion for new trial. State v. Sanders, 260 Iowa 327, 329, 149 N.W.2d 159, 160. It is the fact-finder's function, not ours, to decide fact questions and determine the credibility of witnesses. Its finding of guilt is binding upon us unless we are satisfied it is without substantial support in the evidence or is clearly against the weight thereof. State v. Harrington, Iowa, 178 N.W.2d 314, 315; State v. Badgett, Iowa, 167 N.W.2d 680, 684; State v. DeRaad, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d 108, 109, 112.

In State v. Kaster, Iowa, 160 N.W.2d 856, 859, we say: 'The jury evidently believed the State's witness, as it had every right to do. It is well settled that this court is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Sheffey
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • October 15, 1975
    ...motions for new trial. State v. Kramer, 231 N.W.2d 874 (Iowa 1975); State v. Dalgliesh, 223 N.W.2d 627 (Iowa 1974); State v. Parkey, 200 N.W.2d 518 (Iowa 1972). Unless there clearly appears to be a miscarriage of justice this discretion will rarely be disturbed. State v. Russell, 259 Iowa 1......
  • State v. Fuhrmann, 59256
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 21, 1977
    ...motions for new trial. State v. Kramer, 231 N.W.2d 874 (Iowa 1975); State v. Dalgliesh, 223 N.W.2d 627 (Iowa 1974); State v. Parkey, 200 N.W.2d 518 (Iowa 1972). Unless there clearly appears to be a miscarriage of justice this discretion will rarely be disturbed. State v. Russell, 259 Iowa 1......
  • State v. White, 56592
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 13, 1974
    ...without substantial support in the evidence or is clearly against the weight thereof. State v. Bone, Iowa, 201 N.W.2d 80, 81; State v. Parkey, Iowa, 200 N.W.2d 518; State v. Gray, Iowa, 199 N.W.2d 57, 59; State v. Werner, Iowa, 181 N.W.2d 221, 222. In State v. DeRaad, Iowa, 164 N.W.2d 108, ......
  • State v. Burton, 55233
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • October 18, 1972
    ...person and by name as the person he paid $21 for the three capsules. His credibility was for the jury and not for the court. State v. Parkey, Iowa, 200 N.W.2d 518, filed September 19, 1972; State v. Kaster, Iowa, 160 N.W.2d 856; 30 Am.Jur.2d, Evidence, § The record discloses substantial evi......
  • 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