State v. Priebe, No. 36164.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtDE GRAFF
Citation198 Iowa 609,199 N.W. 276
PartiesSTATE v. PRIEBE.
Decision Date24 June 1924
Docket NumberNo. 36164.

198 Iowa 609
199 N.W. 276

STATE
v.
PRIEBE.

No. 36164.a1

Supreme Court of Iowa.

June 24, 1924.


Appeal from District Court, Woodbury County; A. O. Wakefield, Judge.

Trial on an indictment charging the defendant Priebe, with others, of the crime of cheating by false pretense. He entered a plea of not guilty and on trial of the issues was found guilty. Judgment in conformity to law was entered upon the verdict. Affirmed.

[199 N.W. 277]

Yeaman & Yeaman, of Sioux City, for appellant.

Ben J. Gibson, Atty. Gen., Neill Garrett, Asst. Atty. Gen., and O. T. Naglestad, Co. Atty., and O. D. Nickle, Asst. Co. Atty., both of Sioux City, for the State.


DE GRAFF, J.

The defendant G. H. Priebe, under several aliases, was jointly indicted with John Doe and Richard Roe for the crime of cheating by false pretense. Doe and Roe were not apprehended, and their identity is not disclosed by the record. It is charged that the defendants, with intent to defraud the McDonald Transfer & Storage Company of its money and property, did designedly, falsely, and fraudulently represent that the said defendants were representatives of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees, and that as such representatives they were publishing a Railway Freight and Express Reference Guidebook; that these representations were false and untrue, and that the defendants were not then and there publishing and had no intention of publishing the guidebook aforesaid; that the said McDonald Transfer & Storage Company, relying on said false and fraudulent representations and believing them to be true, were thereby induced and did make payment in a certain sum for advertising space in said guidebook.

[1] The primary proposition advanced by the appellant and upon which reversible error is predicated has to do with the rulings of the trial court in the admission of certain evidence tending to establish that the defendant was a party to a conspiracy to put over a fraudulent scheme to obtain money and property as alleged in the indictment. At the outset it may be said that no evidence was offered that the defendant himself made any false pretense or representation in consummating the fraud upon which the indictment is based, or that any express authority to do the act charged was given by the defendant to those whom it is shown made the false pretense. No presumption of authority to commit a crime arises from the relationship of agency which the principal is called upon to rebut. The presumption of innocence is entitled to more weight than any presumption of authority from the mere fact of agency. Clark & Marshall, The Law of Crimes (2d Ed.) p. 267.

[2][3][4][5] The question is: Did the court err in holding that the state established a prima facie case of conspiracy as a basis for the admission of the declarations and statements of the agents of defendant? These declarations constitute the gist of this case, and if the challenge to their competency is well taken under the record before us the verdict cannot be sustained. Under the instant facts it is essential to establish a conspiracy to connect the defendant with the substantive charge in the indictment. The judgment can be affirmed only on the theory of a conspiracy which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 practice notes
  • State v. Blyth, Nos. 55974
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • February 19, 1975
    ...United States, 314 F.2d 718, 735, n. 21 (9 Cir. 1963), cert. den., 377 U.S. 953, 84 S.Ct. 1626, 12 L.Ed.2d 498. See also State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 610--611, 199 N.W. 276, 277; State v. Davis, 230 Iowa 309, 316, 297 N.W. 274, 277, cert. den., 315 U.S. 814, 62 S.Ct. 799, 86 L.Ed. 1212; A......
  • State v. Sentner, No. 45227.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 17, 1941
    ...should not be admitted until the fact of the conspiracy has been prima facie established by independent testimony. State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 611, 199 N.W. 276;State v. Gilmore, 151 Iowa 618, 132 N.W. 53, 35 L.R.A., N.S., 1084. In fairness to the defendant, and to eliminate chances of e......
  • State v. Schenk, No. 46268.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 3, 1945
    ...216 Iowa 222, 243 N.W. 538;State v. Hartman, 213 Iowa 546, 239 N.W. 107;State v. Terry, 207 Iowa 916, 223 N.W. 870;State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 199 N.W. 276;Boom v. Boom, 206 Iowa 70, 220 N.W. 17. An actual agreement to enter into a conspiracy need not be proved by direct evidence to warr......
  • Iowa City v. Nolan, No. 57504
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • February 18, 1976
    ...deny due process. When the presumption of innocence collides with a lesser inference, the lesser inference must give way. State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 610, 199 N.W. 276, 277 If § 6.54.1 is construed as purporting to make proof of ownership prima facie evidence that the owner illegally par......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
17 cases
  • State v. Blyth, Nos. 55974
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • February 19, 1975
    ...United States, 314 F.2d 718, 735, n. 21 (9 Cir. 1963), cert. den., 377 U.S. 953, 84 S.Ct. 1626, 12 L.Ed.2d 498. See also State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 610--611, 199 N.W. 276, 277; State v. Davis, 230 Iowa 309, 316, 297 N.W. 274, 277, cert. den., 315 U.S. 814, 62 S.Ct. 799, 86 L.Ed. 1212; A......
  • State v. Sentner, No. 45227.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 17, 1941
    ...should not be admitted until the fact of the conspiracy has been prima facie established by independent testimony. State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 611, 199 N.W. 276;State v. Gilmore, 151 Iowa 618, 132 N.W. 53, 35 L.R.A., N.S., 1084. In fairness to the defendant, and to eliminate chances of e......
  • State v. Schenk, No. 46268.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 3, 1945
    ...216 Iowa 222, 243 N.W. 538;State v. Hartman, 213 Iowa 546, 239 N.W. 107;State v. Terry, 207 Iowa 916, 223 N.W. 870;State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 199 N.W. 276;Boom v. Boom, 206 Iowa 70, 220 N.W. 17. An actual agreement to enter into a conspiracy need not be proved by direct evidence to warr......
  • Iowa City v. Nolan, No. 57504
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • February 18, 1976
    ...deny due process. When the presumption of innocence collides with a lesser inference, the lesser inference must give way. State v. Priebe, 198 Iowa 609, 610, 199 N.W. 276, 277 If § 6.54.1 is construed as purporting to make proof of ownership prima facie evidence that the owner illegally par......
  • 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