Donohoe v. State

• Decision Date: 07 July 1894
• Citation: 27 S.W. 226,59 Ark. 375
• Parties: DONOHOE v. STATE
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

27 S.W. 226

59 Ark. 375

DONOHOE v. STATE

Supreme Court of Arkansas

July 7, 1894

Appeal from Garland Circuit Court, ALEXANDER M. DUFFIE, Judge.

Judgment affirmed.

Jas. P Clarke, Attorney General, and Chas. T. Coleman for appellee.

1. The second instruction was properly refused.

2. The modifications of the first and second of defendant's instructions complained of were made in conformity with the provision of the statute defining false pretenses. The statute provides that "every person who, with intent to defraud or cheat another shall," etc., and the court simply substituted the "intent" as mentioned in the statute, for that set forth in the instruction, which was certainly not plainer, and was probably erroneous. Mansf. Dig. sec. 1645.

3. The oral instruction of the court was a fair and correct statement of the law governing the case.

OPINION

RIDDICK, J.

The appellant, Eugene Donohoe, was indicted and tried in the Garland circuit court for the crime of obtaining property by false pretenses. It was alleged that he procured a quantity of lumber and building material from J. R. Loyd and J. M Smith, partners under the firm name of J. R. Loyd & Co., by falsely pretending that he had purchased five acres of land from J. A. Smith at one hundred and twenty-five dollars an acre, upon which land he wished to erect a house, and that he had paid one-half of said purchase money. It was further alleged that these statements concerning the purchase of the land and the payment of half of the purchase money were false.

On the trial the evidence was conflicting. The prosecuting witness Loyd, testified that defendant made the statement to him that he had purchased five acres of land from J. A. Smith, and had paid half of the purchase price, and wished to purchase lumber to build a house on said land; that on this statement he sold and delivered him a quantity of lumber. That, but for this representation concerning the purchase of the land, and the payment of half of the purchase price thereof, he would not have sold him lumber. He also stated that, in addition to this representation, defendant agreed to pay for the lumber in monthly payments of fifteen dollars, and that this was another reason why he let him have lumber. It was shown that defendant had not purchased land, but only obtained permission of owner to build a cabin on it, with the understanding that the owner would sell it to him when the title was cleared up.

Defendant testifying in his own behalf, denied that he had stated to Loyd & Co. that he had purchased five acres of land, and paid half of the purchase price. That he had only stated that he was going to build on land of J. A. Smith, with whom he had made an arrangement for that purpose. That the only inducement he offered to obtain lumber was a promise that he would pay for it in monthly installments of fifteen dollars per month. That he was unable to pay promptly when the first instalment became due, and that Loyd & Co. took lumber away from him. That ...