State v. Semotan

• Decision Date: 12 May 1892
• Citation: State v. Semotan, 85 Iowa 57, 51 N.W. 1161 (Iowa 1892)
• Parties: STATE v. SEMOTAN ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

85 Iowa 57

51 N.W. 1161

STATE

v.SEMOTAN ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

May 12, 1892.

Appeal from district court, Tama county; L. G. KINNE, Judge.

The defendants were indicted upon a charge of maliciously injuring a building.They pleaded “not guilty,” and were tried by jury.When the state had concluded the introduction of the evidence in behalf of the prosecution, the court, on motion of the defendants, directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty, which was done, and the state appeals.J. R. Caldwell and James Fowler, Co. Atty., for the State.

ROTHROCK, J.

The defendants were charged in the indictment with injuring and defacing a building in the town of Vining, “commonly known as the ‘National Hall,’ the property of Lodge Karal JonasNo. 122 of the Bohemian Slavonian Benevolent Society, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of Iowa, by then and there willfully, forcibly, unlawfully, and maliciously striking, kicking, and breaking in the door of said building.”The evidence shows beyond question that on the 10th day of February, 1891, there was a building at Vining, in Tama county, known as “National Hall,” and that on that day the defendants made an attack on the outside door of said building, and, against the protest of the persons in charge of the building, broke down the door, entered the building, and assaulted the persons in charge thereof.It further appears from the evidence that the Lodge Karal JonasNo. 122, a Bohemian benevolent society, was at that time in possession of the building by one John Soatos, one of the trustees of the lodge, and that said lodge was at that time acting as a corporation.These facts were shown by parol evidence.Later in the trial of the cause the state offered to introduce in evidence the record of the incorporation of Lodge Karal JonasNo. 122 of the Bohemian Slavonian Benevolent Society, and a deed of conveyance of the land or lots upon which the building in question was situated, which deed was from one Kucera to said lodge, and another conveyance of the land or lots from the Milwaukee Land Company to said Kucera.All of this evidence was objected to by the defendants, and the objection was sustained.It does not appear what specific objection was made to the articles of incorporation, and counsel for the state have not advised us in their argument why the articles were not permitted to go in evidence.It may be that the articles are not in compliance with the law providing for articles of incorporation.We do not think it is necessary that we should seek for the ground upon which the said evidence was rejected.We are without the aid of argument for the appellees, and in such caseswe determine no more than is actually necessary to dispose of the case.We think that the state was not required to prove a record title to the building known as the ...