People v. Griffith
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County and from an order denying a new trial. Albert G. Burnett, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
The defendant was convicted of the offense of obtaining money by false and fraudulent representations, and ap- ■ peals from the judgment and from an order refusing a new trial.
The indictment was demurred to, and among other points made, it is contended that it does not charge an offense because, after stating what the representations were, it does not contain a sufficient allegation that such representations were false. The representations are stated to have been: “That he, the said W. G. Griffith, was the owner of and in the possession of a certain tract of land situate, lying, and being in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. McGregarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. SteffnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- People v. CoulterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- LaShar v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1924
- People v. CarpenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- People v. CoulterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904