Maynard v. State

Petitioner entered a plea of guilty, was convicted and sentenced pursuant to an “indictment” for the crime of forgery, and now seeks his release on a writ of habeas corpus on the ground, among others, that the indictment did not include the allegation that the forgery was with intent to defraud.

As early as 1869 it was established by the Supreme Court of Ohio in the case of Drake v. State, 19 Ohio St., 211, and it is still the law, that:

“2. An intent to prejudice, damage, or defraud is an essential ingredient in the crime of forgery; and an indictment for that crime must, therefore, charge…