State v. Arnold

48 Iowa 566
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided June 8, 1878·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Day, J.

I. The defendant’s demurrer to the indictment was overruled. The indictment was held sufficient in the case of The State v. Charles Savoye, before alluded to.

II. Upon the trial the State was permitted to prove the .statements of Charles Savoye, containing a detailed and circumstantial admission of the facts constituting the offense. [567]*567These declarations were made long after the alleged offense -was committed. The admission of this evidence was error. “When the common enterprise is at an end, whether by-accomplishment or abandonment, no one of the conspirators is permitted by any subsequent act or declaration of his own to affect the others. His confession, therefore, subsequently made, even though by the plea of guilty, is not admissible in evidence, as such; against any but himself. Under no circumstances can the most solemn admission made by him on trial be evidence against his accomplices.” Wharton’s Criminal Law, § 703, and cases cited.

Eeversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Arnold, 48 Iowa 566 (iowa 1878).

48 Iowa 566 (State v. Arnold) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Martin
200 N.W. 213 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1924)
State v. Crofford
96 N.W. 889 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1903)
Williams v. State
51 S.W. 224 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1899)
State v. Hinkle
54 P. 155 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1898)
Taylor County v. Standley
44 N.W. 911 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1890)