Blocher v. State

• Citation: 177 Ind. 356,98 N.E. 118
• Decision Date: 16 April 1912
• Docket Number: No. 22,003.,22,003.
• Parties: BLOCHER v. STATE.
• Court: Supreme Court of Indiana

177 Ind. 356
98 N.E. 118

BLOCHER
v.
STATE.

No. 22,003.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

April 16, 1912.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cass County; John S. Lairy, Judge.

Charles A. Blocher was convicted of forgery, and he appeals. Affirmed.

[98 N.E. 119]

The affidavit filed in the case was as follows:

“State of Indiana, Cass County-ss.:

“In the Cass Circuit Court, April Term, 1911. State of Indiana v. Charles A. Blocher. Forgery. James H. Stoltz upon his oath says that at the county of Cass and state of Indiana, on or about the 27th day of February, 1911, one Charles A. Blocher did then and there feloniously, falsely and fraudulently make, forge and counterfeit a certain check, purporting to have been made and executed by one Isaac W. Geer, in the form and style of I. W. Geer, payable to C. A. Blocher, or bearer, for the payment of a sum of money, to wit: ten ($10.00) dollars, to the said Charles A. Blocher, or bearer, which said false, forged, and counterfeit check is of the following tenor, viz.:

No. 2196. Logansport, Ind., 2-27, 1911.

The Logansport Loan and Trust Co.

+----------------------------------------+
                ¦Pay to C. A. Blocker, or bearer¦$10.00 ¦
                +-------------------------------+--------¦
                ¦Ten ¦Dollars.¦
                +----------------------------------------+
                

Acct. Penn. Co.

I. W. Geer.

Wm. B. Burford, Lith., Indpls.

-with intent then and there and thereby feloniously, falsely and fraudulently to defraud the said Isaac W. Geer, he, the said Isaac W. Geer, being the party referred to and intended to be designated by the said term I. W. Geer, contrary to the form of

[98 N.E. 120]

the statutes in such cases made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the state of Indiana. James H. Stoltz.

“Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12th day of May, 1911.

“Michael L. Fansler,

“Prosecuting Attorney for the Twenty-Ninth Judicial Circuit of Indiana.”

The appellant urged that the affidavit should have been quashed because it did not directly allege that accused intended to defraud any one, or that Isaac W. Geer was the party referred to and intended to be designated by the term “I. W. Geer.”

Instruction No. 13, given on behalf of accused, mentioned in the opinion, was as follows:

“I instruct you, gentlemen of the jury, that, if there is any single fact proved to the satisfaction of the jury which is inconsistent with the guilt of the defendant, which is sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in your minds as to the guilt of the defendant, the jury should acquit him. If you are not fully convinced of the guilt of the defendant by the evidence in this case that as ordinarily prudent men you would feel safe to act upon the conviction in matters of the highest consideration and importance to your dearest and most important interests under circumstances where there was no compulsion or coercion to act at all, you should find the defendant not guilty.”

Frank V. Guthrie, for appellant. Thomas M. Honan, Atty. Gen., Edwin Corr, Thomas H. Branaman, and James E. McCullough, for the State.

COX, J.

The appellant was indicted for the crime of forgery. He moved to quash the indictment, and his motion was overruled. Upon a plea of not guilty he was put upon trial before a jury. At the close of the evidence for the state, the trial court reconsidered its ruling on appellant's motion to quash the indictment and sustained it, and discharged the jury. Thereafter an affidavit charging the same offense was filed by the prosecuting attorney, and upon it appellant was...