State v. Reed
| Decision Date | 18 October 1883 |
| Citation | 17 N.W. 150,62 Iowa 40 |
| Parties | STATE v. REED |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Sac District Court.
THE defendant was convicted of entering, without breaking, a dwelling house in the night time, with intent to commit larceny, and was sentenced to the penitentiary for four years. From the judgment he appeals.
AFFIRMED.
J. N Davis and B. A. Dolan, for appellant.
Smith McPherson, Attorney-general, for the State.
I.
The prosecuting witness in this case is one Brady. The evidence shows very clearly that some one entered his house during the night with intent to commit larceny. The doubt as to the defendant's guilt, if any, arises upon the question of identity. Both Brady and wife saw the person who entered the house, and thought that they recognized the defendant as that person. On the other hand, the defendant introduced evidence tending to show that he was elsewhere on the night in question, and could not have committed the crime with which he was charged. As pertaining to this evidence, the defendant asked an instruction in these words: The court refused to give this instruction, and instructed as follows: "If there is any reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt of the crime charged against him on the whole evidence, he is entitled to an acquittal."
The defendant, we think, has no reasonable ground of complaint because the court refused to instruct as asked. The instruction asked is not, we think, where taken altogether as favorable to the defendant as the one given. It is, of course, true, that to establish an alibi it is not necessary that the jury should be fully satisfied of its truth. It would be sufficient if the evidence of an alibi preponderates. The doubt is as to whether even that amount is necessary to justify an acquittal. Chief Justice Day and myself think that the defendant is entitled to an acquittal if the evidence of an alibi is sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt of guilt; and I understand the court below as substantially so ruling. I think it would have been impossible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. State
...on the subject was not warranted. (Williams v. State, 128 S.W. 1120; Underwood v. State, 117 S.W. 809; Parker v. State, 49 S.W. 80; State v. Reed, 17 N.W. 150; Jones State, 110 S.W. 80; Phillips v. State, 121 S.W. 1110; Cook v. Terr'y., 3 Wyo. 110; State v. Jackson, 95 Mo. 623; State v. Sey......
-
Villarreal v. State
...at 111; see also 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 691 at 328; Miller, 660 S.W.2d at 96. The Court in Ayres noted the holding in State v. Reed, 62 Iowa 40, 17 N.W. 150 (1883) that alibi is not a defense within the accurate meaning of the word, but a mere fact shown in rebuttal of the State's eviden......
-
State v. Baker, 48355
...the testimony about accidental shooting was but incidental to defendant's plea of not guilty, language of Adams, J. in State v. Reed, 62 Iowa 40, 41, 17 N.W. 150, 151, is in point, to wit: 'The defendant feels that injustice was done him because the court did not specifically call the atten......
-
State v. Albertson, 46828.
...a very loose and colloquial sense that such evidence can be spoken of as tending to establish a defense in a criminal case. State v. Reed, 62 Iowa 40, 17 N.W. 150.’ 152 Iowa at page 407, 132 N.W. at page 859. That part of the dissenting opinion was in harmony with the majority opinion. We t......