Hughes v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 35 — APPEAL PROM DAVEISS CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The appellant being indicted for forgery alleged to have been committed by signing the name of another, it was error to instruct the jury that they might find him guilty if he caused the name to be signed. The instruction allowed him to he found guilty under facts showing him to have been a mere accessory before the fact.
Read the full summary
Case 35 — APPEAL PROM DAVEISS CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The appellant being indicted for forgery alleged to have been committed by signing the name of another, it was error to instruct the jury that they might find him guilty if he caused the name to be signed. The instruction allowed him to he found guilty under facts showing him to have been a mere accessory before the fact. (Stowers v. Commonwealth, 12 Bush, 343; Commonwealth v. Williams, 13 Bush, 267.) And the error in the instruction being a fundamental one, the court must assume that it was prejudicial. 2. The record of every case whore the…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Lewis
The ofíense of which appellant was convicted is pergury, charged in the indictment to have been committed substantially as follows: That he did, willfully and feloniously, make, write, sign and forge the name of Johnsie Cottrell to a paper, purporting on its face to be a promissory note of said Cottrell to Scmidt & Co., the words and figures of which are set out, and that said name was so signed, made, written and forged by .him without knowledge, consent or authority of, and with intent to perpetrate a fraud on, said Cottrell, and also on Scmidt & Co.
The indictment contains a statement of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- James v. CammackCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
- Louisa National Bank v. Kentucky National BankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
- Robinson v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- James v. CammackCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910