Meek v. State

• Decision Date: 11 February 1898
• Parties: MEEK v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

23 So. 155

117 Ala. 116

MEEK v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 11, 1898

Appeal from circuit court, Geneva county; J. W. Foster, Judge.

John B Meek was convicted of obtaining goods under false pretenses and he appealed. Reversed.

The appellant was tried and convicted under the following indictment: "The grand jury of said county charge that before the finding of this indictment John B. Meek did falsely pretend to John S. Collins, a member of the firm of Malone, Collins & Co., a firm doing business in the town of Geneva, Ala., and composed of Geo. Y. Malone, Nace Collins George H. Malone, John S. Collins, Ed. R. Malone, and Henry B. Collins, with intent to defraud, that he, the said John B Meek, lived in Geneva county, Ala., and was preparing to make a crop in Geneva county for the year 1893, and by means of such false pretenses obtained from the said Malone, Collins &amp Co. one wagon of the value of forty-one dollars and thirty-five cents, one stove of the value of thirteen dollars, one pair of pants of the value of three dollars and sixty-five cents, and seven sacks of Goulding guano of the value of seventeen dollars; all being of the aggregate value of seventy-five dollars,-against the peace and dignity of the state of Alabama." The defendant demurred to this indictment upon the following grounds: "(1) The indictment charges no offense under the laws of this state. (2) The representations alleged in said indictment to have been made by the defendant are shown by said indictment to be immaterial. (3) The indictment fails to show or aver that the representations made by the defendant were material. (4) The indictment fails to aver or to show that the representations alleged to have been made were in reference to an existing or a past fact." The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant duly excepted. On the trial of the cause one John Collins was introduced as a witness for the state, and testified that he was a member of the firm of Malone, Collins & Co.; that in December, 1892, he had transactions with the defendant at the store of Malone, Collins & Co., in which he let the defendant have certain articles of merchandise. The witness was then asked the following question: "Did the defendant, at that time, make any declarations or representations to you, and, if so, what were they?" The defendant objected to this question, on the ground that it called for illegal and incompetent testimony, and duly excepted to the court's overruling his motion. The witness, in answer to the question, said, "Yes, the defendant said he wanted to buy a wagon and supplies for the year 1893." The defendant moved to exclude this answer from the jury, on the grounds that it was not responsive to the question, and because it was incompetent and illegal evidence. The court overruled the motion, and the defendant duly excepted. This witness further testified that the defendant said to him that at that time he was farming and living in Geneva county, Ala., and had stock and other property; that the defendant made a mortgage to the witness' firm on the wagon and other property the firm advanced to him. The solicitor then asked the witness the following question: "Did you ever get any pay for these things?" The defendant objected to this question because it called for illegal, irrelevant, and incompetent evidence, and duly excepted to the court's overruling his objection. This witness further testified that at the time of the transactions between the defendant and himself in December, 1892, the defendant told him that he had a horse, yoke of oxen, and other property. The defendant moved to exclude this testimony, upon the ground that the representations as to this property were not charged in the indictment, and cannot be legally proven in this case. The court overruled the motion, and the defendant duly excepted. There was other evidence for the state tending to show that the defendant lived in the state of Florida in the years 1892 and 1893, and that he so lived in Florida when he stated to the witness Collins, of the firm of Malone, Collins & Co., that he lived in Geneva county. Upon the examination of one of the witnesses for the state he was asked the following question: "Did the defendant own a bay horse, about five years old, in December, 1892?" The defendant objected to this question on the ground that it called for irrelevant and immaterial testimony, and duly excepted to the court overruling his motion. Ed. Malone, a witness for the state, testified that he was a member of the firm of Malone, Collins & Co., and that the defendant told him during the month of February, 1893, that he lived in Geneva county, Ala. The defendant objected to this testimony, and moved to exclude it, upon the ground that it was irrelevant and immaterial. The court overruled the objection and motion, and the defendant duly excepted. This witness was then asked the following question by the state: "Suppose he (the defendant) had told you that he lived in Florida, would you have sold him the goods?" The defendant objected to this question, because it called for incompetent and illegal testimony, and duly excepted to the court's overruling his motion. Upon the witness answering that he would not, the defendant moved to exclude this answer from the jury, and duly excepted to the court's overruling his motion. Upon the introduction of one Holman, a witness for the defendant, he testified that he (defendant) came to his house during the fall of that year (1893), and sought work, and this witness was then asked by the defendant the following question: "If, when he (the defendant) came there to work,...