Legal Opinion

State v. Appleby

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 12, 1899PublishedCited by 2 opinions

On motion to quash an indictment.

1Opinion of the Court

*527The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dixon, J.

The substantial question in this case is whether the indictment which charges the defendant with obtaining by false pretences “a large amount of dry and fancy goods of the value of twenty-seven hundred dollars,” describes the property obtained with sufficient certainty.

In Hagerman v. State, 25 Vroom 104, this court, speaking by Mr. Justice Reed, declared that as a general rule the same certainty of description is required in an indictment for obtaining goods by false pretences as in an indictment for larceny. The leading objects of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cunningham v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1898
  2. Hagerman v. StateSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1891

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Winnick v. ReillySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
  2. State v. LamoreauxNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API