People v. Di Laura, 162.
| Decision Date | 06 June 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 162.,162. |
| Citation | 259 Mich. 260,243 N.W. 49 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. DI LAURA et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Recorder's Court of Detroit; Christopher E. Stein, Judge.
Ottilio Di Laura and Orlando Di Laura were convicted of conspiring to obtain money by false pretenses, subtle means, and devices, and they appeal.
Reversed, and new trial granted.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Frank B. Ferguson and Joseph M. Weiss, Jr., both of Detroit, for appellants.
Paul W. Voorhies, Atty. Gen., Harry S. Toy, Pros. Atty., and Walter Phillips and Edmund E. Shepherd, Asst. Pros. Attys., all of Detroit, for the People.
The information charged defendants with conspiring to obtain money by false pretenses, subtle means and devices, from five named persons. Defendants were convicted and prosecute review.
Defendants operated a private bank and received money to be forwarded to Italy, and, it was claimed, converted the same to their own use. There was also a count in the information for larceny by conversion, but this was waived by the prosecution at the close of all proofs.
The court was requested to instruct the jury as to what would constitute subtle means, devices, and false pretenses, but failed to do so.
The information charged a conspiracy to defraud. This necessarily involved a combination to accomplish a fraud. We find no evidence justifying the finding of a conspiracy. It appears that persons, without solicitation other than the existence of a bank, deposited money to be forwarded to Italy, and such money was not forwarded by defendants. Whether this constituted the crime of larceny by conversion we need not determine for such charge was withdrawn.
To constitute a conspiracy, there must exist a combination to accomplish an unlawful end, or a lawful end by unlawful means.
The verdict was not supported by the proofs, and the convictions are reversed and new trials granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Erwin
... ... what they conspired to do can have but one meaning. In the ... case of People v. Tenerowicz , 1934, 266 ... Mich. 276, 253 N.W. 296, 298, the indictment was almost in ... offense. Citing People v. Di Laura , 259 ... Mich. 260, 243 N.W. 49; People v. Clark , 10 ... Mich. 310; People v. Petheram , ... 710; State v ... Baum , 47 Utah 7, 151 P. 518; State v ... Frisby , 49 Utah 227, 162 P. 616; State v ... Elmer , 49 Utah 6, 161 P. 167; State v ... Cox , 74 Utah 149, 277 P ... ...
-
People v. Blume
...Potwora, 44 AD2d 207 [354 N.Y.S.2d 492 (1974) ]."12 See also People v. Atley, supra 392 Mich. at 310, 220 N.W.2d 465; People v. Di Laura, 259 Mich. 260, 243 N.W. 49 (1932).13 The Court of Appeals held that a " 'jury could infer the existence of the agreement necessary to the charge from the......
-
People v. Atley
...possessed by More than one individual since there can be no conspiracy without a combination of two or more persons. People v. DiLaura, 259 Mich. 260, 243 N.W. 49 (1932). Where only one person has knowledge of the unlawful end, there is no combined intent to do what is unlawful. Perkins, On......
-
People v. Anderson
...without a combination of two or more persons". People v. Atley, 392 Mich. 298, 310, 220 N.W.2d 465 (1974); People v. DiLaura, 259 Mich. 260, 262, 243 N.W. 49 (1932). Since the statute requires proof of an agreement of at least two persons, the common-law "no one-man conspiracy" rule is appl......