Donohoe v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court. Alexander M. Dueeie, Judge. 1. The second instruction was properly refused. 2. The modifications of the first and second of defendant’s instructions complained of were made in conformity with the provision of the statute defining false pretenses.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court. Alexander M. Dueeie, Judge. 1. The second instruction was properly refused. 2. The modifications of the first and second of defendant’s instructions complained of were made in conformity with the provision of the statute defining false pretenses. The statute provides that * ‘every person who, with intent to defraud or cheat another shall,” etc., and the court simply substituted the “intent” as mentioned in the statute, for that set forth in the instruction, which was certainly not plainer, and was probably erroneous. Mansf. Dig. sec. 1645. 3. The oral…
1Opinion of the CourtRiddick, J.
The appellant, Rugene Donohoe, was indicted and tried in the Garland circuit court for the crime of obtaining property by false pretenses. It was alleged that he procured a quantity of lumber and building materiahfrom J. R. Loyd and J. M. Smith, partners under the firm name of J. R. Loyd & Co., by falsely pretending that he had purchased five acres of land from J. A. Smith at one hundred and twenty-five dollars an acre, upon which land he wished to erect a house, and that he had paid one-half of said purchase money. It was further alleged that these statements concerning the purchase of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Parker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Morris v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
- Partridge v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1913
- Bruce v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954