Legal Opinion

Honeycutt v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided November 2, 1951PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WADDILL, Commissioner.

Appellant, Nathan Honeycutt, was convicted of knowingly uttering a forged deed and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. KRS 434.130.

The following grounds are relied upon in appellant’s brief for reversal : (1) error in overruling demurrer to the indictment, (2) error in admitting incompetent evidence and (3) error in failing to instruct the jury on the whole law of the case.

The indictment sets forth the acts constituting the uttering of the writing in sufficient terms. It is immaterial who committed the forgery, or how it was done. The falsity of the paper is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lockard v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1888
  2. Commonwealth v. CochranCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Finley v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API