State v. Hicks
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Indictment against J. F. Flicks for obtaining goods under false pretenses. From sentence, defendant appeals. cite: Intent is the gist of the crime: 12 Fncy., 825; 19 Cyc., 413-437; 21 S. C., 353. It cannot be inferred from false pretense: 12 Ency., 825; 19 Cyc., 413; 2 Bish. Cr. Raw, 409-488; 10 R. R. A., 302; 28 R. R. A., 122; 9 S. E., 575; 21 At.
Read the full summary
Indictment against J. F. Flicks for obtaining goods under false pretenses. From sentence, defendant appeals. cite: Intent is the gist of the crime: 12 Fncy., 825; 19 Cyc., 413-437; 21 S. C., 353. It cannot be inferred from false pretense: 12 Ency., 825; 19 Cyc., 413; 2 Bish. Cr. Raw, 409-488; 10 R. R. A., 302; 28 R. R. A., 122; 9 S. E., 575; 21 At. R., 1025; 33 S. O., 853. Charge is erroneous as instructing jury zvhat inference to draw from evidence: 48 S. C., 148; 47 S. C., 523; 56 S. C., 531; 49 S. C., 556. Oral argument.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion- of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Jones.
The defendant was convicted, with recommendation to mercy, on an indictment under Section 168, Criminal Code, charging the offense of obtaining money under false pretenses, with intent to cheat and defraud the prosecutor, Thomas Sloan.
The testimony of the prosecutor tended to show that at Greenville, S. C., on Saturday, July 7, 1906, after banicing hours, the defendant, representing that he had $1,000 in the People’s- Bank of Greenville, requested the prosecutor to cash his check on said 'bank for $25.00, which the prosecutor did,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. DickinsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000
- State v. MooreSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- Simpson v. AntleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- State v. MooreSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924
- State v. StoneSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1913