Harrod v. State

Appellant was convicted of the offense known as “false pretense” and sentenced, all in accordance with §2947 Burns 1926. His motion for a new trial, specifying that the finding of the court is contrary to law and not sustained by sufficient evidence, was overruled and this ruling is assigned as error.

We will give attention to the facts and evidence pertinent to the questions involved in this appeal. On November 8,1923, Corbin V. Harrod and this appellant, Gailard D. Harrod, were engaged in selling automobiles under the firm name of “Harrod Overland Company,” and on that day appellant…