Hopkins v. Com.
| Decision Date | 16 October 1959 |
| Citation | 328 S.W.2d 419 |
| Parties | Joe HOPKINS, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Sanders & Redwine, Pikeville, for appellant.
Jo M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen., William E. Allender, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
CULLEN, Commissioner.
Joe Hopkins was found guilty of uttering a forged check, KRS 434.130, and judgment was entered imposing a two-year sentence. He appeals, asserting several grounds of error.
The check in question was drawn by the Truax-Traer Coal Company on the Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, Illinois, payable to Marie Allen James. The evidence for the Commonwealth was that Hopkins and one Clyde Parker Crum came into the place of business of Virgil Sykes; Hopkins ordered a case of beer and asked if Sykes would take a check; the latter said he would if the check was 'good;' at Hopkins' request, Crum produced the check from his pocket, already bearing the purported indorsement of Marie Allen James, and Crum thereupon wrote the further indorsement, 'Clyde Parsons;' Hopkins then handed the check to Sykes and was given the case of beer and some change.
The Commonwealth endeavored to prove that both indorsements were forgeries. However, at the time of the trial Marie Allen James was dead, and the only evidence tending to show that her indorsement was forged was the testimony of a police officer that he had 'received information' from Mrs. James that this check and another one were missing from her mail box. This testimony was admitted over the objection of the defendant.
The testimony clearly was hearsay, and should not have been admitted. Since it was the only evidence tending to show a forgery of Mrs. James' signature, its admission must be considered prejudicial.
Another alleged error concerns the refusal of the trial court to permit the defendant to impeach the testimony of Virgil Sykes by showing he had made inconsistent statements in his testimony upon a former trial. On cross-examination, Sykes was asked whether or not at the former trial he had stated that, at the time the check was given to him, he had been told by Hopkins that the latter's companion was Clyde Parker Crum. His reply was, 'Not to my remembrance, I didn't.' Subsequently, the defendant offered the court reporter at the former trial as a witness to prove that Sykes had in fact made such statement, but the court refused to permit the reporter to testify.
The refusal to admit the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Francis v. Com.
...facto, doing business as such. Carter v. Commonwealth, supra; Morse v. Commonwealth, 129 Ky. 294, 111 S.W. 714 (1908); Hopkins v. Commonwealth, Ky., 328 S.W.2d 419 (1959). In this case the check was introduced in evidence and it bore the printed legend 'American National Bank and Trust Comp......
-
Castle v. Com.
...time the appellants had offered to sell some wire to him. This testimony was hearsay and should have been excluded. Hopkins v. Commonwealth, Ky., 328 S.W.2d 419 (1959); Tinsley v. Commonwealth, Ky., 283 S.W.2d 362 The Commonwealth cites Blanton v. Commonwealth, Ky., 320 S.W.2d 626 (1958), a......