State v. Jones
Supreme Court of Iowa
1DissentGarfield, J.
(dissenting) — I respectfully dissent from Division I of the foregoing opinion. I think the only logical conclusion to be drawn from our cases on statutory rape is that the court should have submitted to the jury the included offense of assault with intent to commit incest. Such offense is necessarily included within every charge of incest against a man where the prosecutrix is not an accomplice. This court is committed to the doctrine that incest may be committed without the consent of the other party. State v. Mentzer, 230 Iowa 804, 806, 298 N. W. 893, 894, and cases cited; State v.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. HurdSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- State v. RobySupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
- State v. BrooksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- State v. HoaglinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- State v. BeltzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1938
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.