State v. Young
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Wilbourn (Iowa 1934)
- State v. Essex (Iowa 1933)
- State v. Browning (Iowa 1911)
- People v. Triscoli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1907)
- State v. Todd (Iowa 1900)
- People v. Whittemore (Mich. 1894)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The only question presented for our decision, is as to the sufficiency of the indictment under the statute quoted. The appellant’s counsel claim that extortion or pecuniary advantage are the principal and necessary ingredients in the offense, and must be charged in the indictment, or it is bad.
The indictment is sufficient. The statute defines the crimes and prescribes the penalty for the doing of either one of two things: First, to maliciously' threaten, etc., with intent to extort money or pecuniary advantage; second, to maliciously threaten, etc., with intent to compel the person threatened to do an act against his will. This indictment charges the latter. For the purpose of showing the true interpretation of the statute and that the offense charged is within it, the section may be read
. Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.