State v. McDonald
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HENRY, Justice.
We granted certiorari in this case to consider the single question of whether the reliance of the victim upon the false representation or pretense is necessary to sustain a conviction under Section 39-1901, T.C.A.1
We respond in the negative.
*651I.
Respondent was convicted upon an indictment which charged that he obtained from the county court clerk of Davidson County a clear and unencumbered title to a 1972 Ford LTD automobile which was encumbered by a lien in favor of Purity Dairies Employees Federal Credit Union, by falsely and fraudulently representing that a lien in favor…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Raley v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- United States v. CardiffSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Commonwealth v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
- State v. HigginsTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Mullican v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In re McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- In Re McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- State v. ButlerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1994
- State of Tennessee v. Jacqueline CrankTennessee Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. WilkinsTennessee Supreme Court · 1983
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.