Driver v. State

THOMAS, Justice,

specially concurring, with whom RAPER, Chief Justice, joins.

I concur in the result reached in the majority opinion, and accept the rationale *395presented there so far as it goes. It seems, however, in the context of the facts set forth, there are implicit in these circumstances other representations as to past or existing facts which the jury well could have found to have been false when made.

By his conduct and statements at the time, Driver represented to Briggs that he was seeking a loan for Driver-Robins, Inc.; that he had authority to obtain the loan for the business; and…