Legal Opinion

State v. Hatfield

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 9, 1911No. 9740PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Main, J., entered March 4, 1911, upon a trial and conviction of forgery.

1Opinion of the CourtGose, J.

— The defendant was convicted upon an information charging him with uttering a forged deed. This appeal followed.

The court instructed the jury as follows:

“You are instructed that the mere uttering, as heretofore explained to you, is of itself a circumstance from which knowledge of its falsity may he presumed. I mean by that, if you find from the evidence that this particular deed described in the information was forged; that is, falsified, and you further find that it was uttered by the defendant, then you have a right to presume from these facts that he knew that it was forged at the time of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. PayneWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. State v. WaltersWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  3. State v. BlissWashington Supreme Court · 1902
  4. State v. HumasonWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  5. People v. NoregeaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. LewWashington Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Chaffee v. HawkinsWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  3. State v. ElliottWashington Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Pollock v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
  5. Velikanje v. MillichampWashington Supreme Court · 1912

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API