Commonwealth v. Warren
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 111 — INDICTMENT— The indictment is good, and the demurrer should have been overruled. (Bishop’s Crim. Proc., vol. 2, title, Raise Pretense; Barnard v. Commonwealth, 94 Ky.) 1. To constitute a false pretense within the meaning of the statute, the representation must be as to a then existing or past fact in contradistinction to something to be done in the future. (Wharton’s Am. Crim.
Read the full summary
Case 111 — INDICTMENT— The indictment is good, and the demurrer should have been overruled. (Bishop’s Crim. Proc., vol. 2, title, Raise Pretense; Barnard v. Commonwealth, 94 Ky.) 1. To constitute a false pretense within the meaning of the statute, the representation must be as to a then existing or past fact in contradistinction to something to be done in the future. (Wharton’s Am. Crim. Law, secs. 2118-2129; Commonwealth v. Haughey, 3 Met., 224; Glaekan v. Commonwealth, Idem, 233.) 2. The statute does not include cases where the party defrauded has the means of detection at hand.…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HAZELRIGG
delivered the opinion op the court.
The sufficiency of the following indictment is in question on this appeal:
“The grand jury of the county of Marion, in the name and by the authority of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, accuse William Warren of the crime of obtaining the signature of another to a writing, the false making whereof would be a forgery, by false pretenses, with the intent to commit a fraud, com*617mitted in manner and form as follows, to wit: The said William Warren, in the said county of Marion, on the 9th day of July, A. I)., 1890, and before the finding; of the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. HigginsTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Steely v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- Winnett v. StateStark Circuit Court · 1899