State v. Wingard
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Second District Court, Parish of Bienville. Boone, J. 1. In any indictment for forging, uttering, stealing, embezzling, destroying or concealing, or for obtaining by false pretenses auy instrument, it shall be sufficient to describe such instrument by any name or designation by which the same may be usually known, or "by tlie purport thereof, without sotting out any copy or fac simile thereof, or otherwise describing the same, or the value thereof.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Second District Court, Parish of Bienville. Boone, J. 1. In any indictment for forging, uttering, stealing, embezzling, destroying or concealing, or for obtaining by false pretenses auy instrument, it shall be sufficient to describe such instrument by any name or designation by which the same may be usually known, or "by tlie purport thereof, without sotting out any copy or fac simile thereof, or otherwise describing the same, or the value thereof. R. S. Section 1049. 2. The essential elements of a forgery are: 1st. A writing in such a form as to be apparently of some legal…
1Opinion of the Court
Tlie opinion of the Court was delivered by
Bermudez, C. J.
The defendant was convicted of forgery and sentenced to two years at hard labor.
He complains, on appeal, that the lower court erred in holding that the instrument alleged in the indictment is such as can be forged; that said instrument is complete and can be the basis of legal liability; and that, under the averments, evidence could he received explanatory of the instrument.
The indictment charges that the accused, on a day stated, in the parish named, did falsely and fraudulently forge and counterfeit a certain writing or paper of the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1927
- People v. . RisingNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Bunker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1915
- State v. HarperSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1919