Mitchell v. State

1. Evidence disclosing efforts on the part of a witness to ascertain the existence and place of business of an alleged .corporation, falsely represented by the accused to be engaged in a particular legitimate business and in a designated city, was not inadmissible merely for the reason that such efforts were made after the perpetration of the fraud for which the accused was prosecuted. Evidence that no such corporation existed shortly after the perpetration of the fraud was a circumstance tending to negative its existence at the time the accused represented that it was a going concern.…