State v. Reinheimer

Decision Date28 October 1899
Citation80 N.W. 669,109 Iowa 624
PartiesSTATE v. REINHEIMER.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from district court, Linn county; H. M. Remley, Judge.

Defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted of the crime of seduction, and from the judgment imposed appeals. Reversed.James E. Bromwell, E. W. Griffith, and Smith & Smith, for appellant.

Milton Remley, Atty. Gen., Chas. A. Vanvleck, and W. O. Clemans, for the State.

DEEMER, J.

The accused is charged with having seduced one Nora Dixon on or about December 25, 1896. A witness with whom the prosecutrix was stopping at the time she claims to have been seduced testified to certain facts tending to show she (the prosecutrix) was enceinte in February of the year 1896, and then said: “I say she was in a delicate condition because she was sick the same that any woman is; that is, sick in that way.” On motion of the state, the court struck out the conclusion of the witness that prosecutrix was in a delicate condition, but allowed her testimony as to the fact of her condition to remain before the jury. The ruling was correct. The evidence stricken was the mere conclusion of the witness drawn from facts allowed to remain in the record, and as such it was inadmissible. The witness was not an expert, and the facts upon which the witness gave her opinion were not so numerous, or of such nature, as that they could not be clearly brought before the jury. In these respects the case differs from those relied on by appellant.

2. A witness was offered by defendant to prove the general reputation of the prosecutrix as to chastity. This evidence was properly rejected. State v. Prizer, 49 Iowa, 531;State v. Shean, 32 Iowa, 88.

3. The defendant offered in evidence what purported to be the extended notes of the evidence of the prosecutrix taken down by a shorthand reporter at the time of the preliminary examination of the defendant, and this evidence was rejected. This ruling was also correct. Such evidence could only be used for impeaching purposes, and we have heretofore held that it cannot be so used. State v. Hayden, 45 Iowa, 11. In any event, the whole of the witness' testimony before the committing magistrate was immaterial. Only such parts of it as were at variance with her testimony given upon the trial of this case, and to which her attention had been called, were proper to be considered for purposes of impeachment.

4. After defendant had introduced evidence tending to show the unchastity of the prosecutrix, the state was permitted to sustain her character by proof of her general reputation in the community in which she lived. This evidence was certainly competent. State v. Shean and State v. Prizer, supra.

5. The fifth instruction relates to the corroboration of the evidence of the prosecutrix required by the statutes of the state. No complaint is made of the instruction, but it is said there is no evidence on which to base it. We have frequently held that the fact that the parties kept company, and acted as lovers usually do, and other like circumstances, are sufficient to constitute the corroborating evidence necessary to connect the defendant with the offense. State v. McClintic, 73 Iowa, 665, 35 N. W. 696;State v. Wells, 48 Iowa, 671;State v. Hayes, 105 Iowa, 86, 74 N. W. 757;State v. Curran, 51 Iowa, 112, 49 N. W. 1006.

6. Some claim is made that the offense is barred by the statute of limitations. The prosecutrix testified that she yielded her virtue on December 25, 1896. The indictment was found on January 19, 1898. If the witness is to be believed, the offense is not barred.

7. The motion for a new trial was accompanied by affidavits tending to show newlydiscovered evidence relating to the chastity...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Fulcher
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 23, 1918
    ... ... circumstances should be sufficiently strong in themselves, ... and pertinent in their bearing upon the case, to satisfy ... the jury of the truthfulness of the witness in her ... testimony on the principal facts." ...          It is ... held in State v. Reinheimer, 109 Iowa, 624, 80 N.W ... 669, that in a prosecution for seduction the fact that the ... parties kept company and acted as lovers usually do, and ... other like circumstances, are sufficient confirmation and ... support of the evidence of the prosecutrix required by the ... statute. With ... ...
  • State v. Fulcher
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 23, 1918
  • State v. Reinheimer
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • October 28, 1899

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