Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

44 Iowa 96

State v. Hale

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided September 21, 1876

Supreme Court of Iowa · decided 1876-09-21

The defendant, having been indicted for keeping a house of ill fame, filed a plea of not guilty, and afterward applied for leave to withdraw her plea, and to file a motion to set aside the indictment; the application and motion being in the following words: “The State oe Iowa v. Madam Hale. “ Comes núw the defendant and files this her motion asking leave of the court to withdraw her plea of not guilty, and file a motion to set aside the indictment, as provided in section…

Decided 1876-09-21

Adams, J.

¶1We are of the opinion that the defendant should have been allowed to withdraw her plea of not guilty, and to file a motion to set aside the indictment. In State v. Groome, 10 Iowa, 308, it was held that the defendant did not, by accepting a jury, waive objection to the incompetency of a juror on account of not being an elector of the State, the fact of his incompetency not being known to the defendant at the time.

¶2In State v. Abrahams, 6 Iowa, 117, it was held that where two offenses were charged in the indictment, and a plea of not guilty was filed, the defendant should have been allowed to withdraw the plea for the purpose of filing a motion to require *98the prosecutor to elect on which of the offenses charged in the indictment he would proceed to trial.

¶3In Cochrane v. State, 6 Md., 400, Le Grand, Ch. J., said: “It must be confessed that there is no little indistinctness in the reported cases whether the right to withdraw the plea of not guilty and to demur, belongs unconditionally to the prisoner, or is a matter of favor to be granted by the court. We thinkj however, that the better opinion is, as is clearly the justice in the'matter, that the prisoner has the right.”

¶4Reversed.

/44/iowa/96 · .json · Public domain