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
- State v. PayneWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. WaltersWashington Supreme Court · 1893
- State v. BlissWashington Supreme Court · 1902
- State v. HumasonWashington Supreme Court · 1893
- People v. NoregeaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. LewWashington Supreme Court · 1946
- Chaffee v. HawkinsWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- State v. ElliottWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Pollock v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
- Velikanje v. MillichampWashington Supreme Court · 1912
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.