Legal Opinion

State v. Allen

Montana Supreme Court

Decided October 11, 1954No. 9376PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MR. JUSTICE FREEBOURN:

Defendant, charged by information, with a felony — obtaining personal property by means of artifice or pretense, commonly called confidence game or bunco — was upon trial convicted by a jury. From the judgment of conviction defendant appeals.

The information charges that defendant “did commit the crime of obtaining money by artifice or pretense, in this, to-wit: That said defendant * * * did obtain from one Elsie Dibble certain personal property, to-wit: a diamond ring of a value in excess of fifty dollars * * * by means of artifice or pretense, commonly called confidence…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Morton v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  2. State v. GaimosMontana Supreme Court · 1916
  3. State v. SmithMontana Supreme Court · 1920
  4. State v. SauterMontana Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Maxwell v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1895

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  2. State v. HaleMontana Supreme Court · 1958
  3. E. H. Tate Co. v. Jiffy Enterprises, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. State v. AllenMontana Supreme Court · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API