State v. Williams
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | BECK |
| Citation | State v. Williams, 70 Iowa 52, 29 N.W. 801 (Iowa 1886) |
| Decision Date | 27 October 1886 |
| Parties | STATE v. WILLIAMS. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Pocahontas district court.
Upon an information filed before a justice of the peace defendant was convicted of carrying upon his person a concealed weapon, a revolver, and fined in the sum of $100. Upon an appeal to the district court he was again convicted, and fined in the sum of $50. He appeals to this court.McEwen & Garlock and Robinson & Milchrist, for appellant.
A. J. Baker, Atty. Gen., for the State.
1. The statute under which defendant was convicted (Code, § 3879) is in the following language:
It will be observed that the intent or purpose with which the weapon is carried, is not an element of the statutory offense. Nor does the statute provide that it must be carried with the knowledge of the defendant, or willfully; i. e., “of set purpose; voluntary; showing design.” The obvious purpose of the statute is to forbid the carrying of weapons upon the person for any and all purposes. It therefore becomes unnecessary, in a prosecution for the offense, to charge and prove the willful carrying of a weapon on the person with the knowledge of the accused that the weapon was carried upon his person, and that the thing carried was a weapon. If the weapon was carried upon the person through restraint, or in ignorance of its real character, or for any innocent or lawful purpose, without a doubt this would be a good defense to the prosecution. But the defense need not be negatived by allegations and proof in a criminal prosecution for the offense.
2. The evidence shows the carrying of the weapon upon the person at and before the time charged in the information. Defendant in his own testimony admits it, and the fact is shown by other witnesses. Defendant introduced no evidence tending to show that he carried the weapon through restraint,or in ignorance of its true character. Indeed, the evidence clearly and positively shows the contrary state of facts. In our opinion, the evidence sufficiently supports the verdict of the jury. The position of counsel,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Horn v. United States
...in the indictment. Lemon v. United States, 164 F. 953, 90 C.C.A. 617; Ewing v. United States, 136 F. 53, 69 C.C.A. 61; State v. Williams, 70 Iowa, 52, 29 N.W. 801; Bishop's New Cr. Pro. Secs. 326-513. However, the indictment alleges that such representations so to be made were in fact false......
-
State v. Krana
...the presence of the gun. State v. Williams, 184 Iowa 1070, 169 N.W. 371. See also State v. Davidson, 217 N.W.2d 630 (Iowa); State v. Williams, 70 Iowa 52, 29 N.W. 801; People v. Stephens, 58 Mich.App. 701, 228 N.W.2d 527; People v. Balog, 56 Mich.App. 624, 224 N.W.2d 725; II Iowa Uniform Ju......
- State v. Williams