State v. Bowman
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Poweshiek District Court. Indictment for seduction. There was trial, verdict of guilty, and a motion for a new trial filed when the verdict was rendered. The motion was overruled and judgment pronounced sentencing the defendant to the penitentiary. Erom the action of the court in the premises the defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Poweshiek District Court. Indictment for seduction. There was trial, verdict of guilty, and a motion for a new trial filed when the verdict was rendered. The motion was overruled and judgment pronounced sentencing the defendant to the penitentiary. Erom the action of the court in the premises the defendant appealed. At the subsequent term of the District Court the defendant presented a petition for a new trial, based on newly discovered evidence, which evidence had been discovered and come to the knowledge of defendant since the trial and judgment. The court refused to entertain…
1Opinion of the CourtSeevers, J.
1. seduction: previous character. I. In the third instruction the court said to the jury that the previously chaste character of the prosecutrix was presumed, but that such presumption ... . , , , , , 1 . could be rebutted by proven or admitted tacts or the circumstances in the case.
This instruction is correct. State v. Higdon, 32 Iowa, 262.
II. It is' assigned as error that the jury disregarded the instructions and found the defendant guilty on the unsupported testimony of the prosecutrix. A careful reading of the testimony by each member of the court satisfies us all, without doubt or…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. HigdonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
3Cited by19 opinions
- State v. CaterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- State v. CraftonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- State v. LeeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- State v. WatsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- State v. BaughmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.