Allen v. State case brief summary
153 N.E. 218 (1926)
CASE FACTS
In his application for rehearing, defendant contended that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it made no difference whether the victim paid defendant the money out of her own pocket or whether defendant had collected the money and held it for the victim as her agent. Defendant alleged that since the false pretenses statute provided for punishing someone who obtained anything of value by false pretenses, he could not be convicted of obtaining money of which he already had possession.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court denied a rehearing.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
153 N.E. 218 (1926)
CASE SYNOPSIS
After the court affirmed a trial
court's judgment finding defendant guilty of obtaining money under
false pretenses, defendant filed an application for rehearing.CASE FACTS
In his application for rehearing, defendant contended that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it made no difference whether the victim paid defendant the money out of her own pocket or whether defendant had collected the money and held it for the victim as her agent. Defendant alleged that since the false pretenses statute provided for punishing someone who obtained anything of value by false pretenses, he could not be convicted of obtaining money of which he already had possession.
DISCUSSION
- In denying the rehearing, the court found that the fact that defendant had possession of the money as an agent and obtained title to it by false pretenses was sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement that defendant obtain the property by false pretenses.
- According to the court, it was not necessary that defendant obtain possession of the property by false pretenses.
CONCLUSION
The court denied a rehearing.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
No comments:
Post a Comment