Commonwealth v. Moore
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 83 — APPEAL FROM SIMPSON CIRCUIT COURT. It was the' false representation of present and existing conditions, whereby defendant obtained the money. His promise to do certain things with the money was a mere incident to the fraud whereby he obtained it. (Gen. Stats., chap. 29, art. 15.)
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HOLT
delivered the opinion op the court.
The demurrer to this indictment for obtaining money upon false pretenses was doubtless sustained upon the ground that the false representation related to something to take place in the future. An indictment for this offense must not only set forth the pretenses whereby the money was obtained, but they must relate to some pretended past occurrence or existing fact. No representation of any thing to be done or to take place in futuro is a pretense within the meaning of the statute, as has been heretofore decided by this court. (Glackan v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Glackan v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
3Cited by6 opinions
- Extendicare Homes, Inc. v. WhismanKentucky Supreme Court · 2015
- Button v. DrakeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1946
- McDowell v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
- Pueblo v. SierraSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1918
- Steely v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.