Snider v. State

• Decision Date: 18 December 1940
• Docket Number: A-9719.
• Citation: 108 P.2d 552,71 Okla.Crim. 98
• Parties: SNIDER v. STATE.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

108 P.2d 552

71 Okla.Crim. 98

SNIDER v. STATE.

No. A-9719.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

December 18, 1940

Syllabus by the Court.

1. A variance in a criminal case is an essential difference between the accusation and the proof; and a variance is not material unless it is such as might mislead the defense, or expose the defendant to the injury of being put twice in jeopardy for the same offense.

2. In a prosecution based upon § 2125, O.S.1931; 21 Okl.St.Ann. § 1577, it is not necessary to prove that any particular person was defrauded. If the information charges that a particular person or persons were defrauded, such allegation will be considered as surplusage; and the state's proof will be held sufficient, if it shows that the defendant uttered and passed a written instrument, knowing the same to be forged with the general intent in his mind to cheat and defraud whether the intention is to cheat and defraud the particular persons named in the information or any other person who might be affected by the uttering and passing of said forged instrument.

3. Proof of general intent to defraud is sufficient for conviction, even though no actual person is defrauded. The intent is always a question for the jury, and may be inferred by them from what the accused does and says and from all the facts and circumstances involved in the transaction.

4. As a general rule, evidence of other offenses, though of the same nature, is not admissible for the purpose of showing that defendant is guilty of the particular offense charged however, evidence of other offenses is competent to prove the specific offense charged when it tends to establish a systematic scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more offenses so related to each other that proof of one tends to establish the other, or to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged.

5. Held, the instructions given by the trial court are proper and applicable to the law of the case.

6. Held, the trial court did not abuse his discretion in fixing the punishment of defendant, and said punishment is not excessive under the proof in the case.

Appeal from District Court, Jackson County; John B. Wilson, Judge.

Elmer Snider was convicted of forgery in the second degree, and he appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Ryan Kerr, of Oklahoma City, Carroll Moody, of Pauls Valley, and Raymond Barry, of Hollis, for plaintiff in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Weldon Ferris, Co. Atty., of Altus, for defendant in error.

JONES Judge.

The defendant Elmer Snider was charged in the District Court of Jackson County with the offense of forgery in the second degree, was tried, convicted by a jury, and the punishment left to the court. The court thereupon sentenced the defendant to serve a term of five years' imprisonment in the State Penitentiary, and the defendant has appealed to this court.

The information against the defendant reads as follows:

"I, Weldon Ferris, County Attorney of the County of Jackson and State of Oklahoma, duly authorized and empowered by law to inform of offenses committed and triable within said County and State, come now here and give the Court to understand and be informed, that at and within said County and State, on or about the 10th day of January, 1938, and anterior to the filing of this information, Elmer Snider, then and there being, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, wrongfully, fraudulently and feloniously, sell, exchange and deliver to one Grady Blackstone, the owner and operator of the Blackstone Plumbing and Supply Store of Altus, Oklahoma, for the consideration of $18.65, a certain forged, fictitious and counterfeited check in words and figures as follows, to-wit:

Altus, Okla. 1-10-1938 No....

The Altus National Bank--Pay to

--J. H. Ready or Order $18.65 Eighteen and 65/100 Dollars.

R. H. Reid, Spl.

Endorsed: J. H. Ready

Elmer Snider"

"and that the said Elmer Snider then and there well knowing the said check, an engagement for the payment of money absolute, to be false and forged, to-wit: that the said check which purported to bear the endorsement thereon of J. H. Ready and said endorsement to be the act and deed of one J. H. Ready, was false, forged and fictitious and the endorsement signature of the said J. H. Ready upon said check was not the true and genuine signature of the said J. H. Ready, but was false and forged as the said Elmer Snider then and there well knew, but the said Elmer Snider then and there knowingly, wilfully, unlawfully, fraudulently and feloniously made such sale, exchange and delivery with the unlawful, fraudulent, and felonious intent, then and there on the part of him, the said Elmer Snider, to have said check uttered and passed and to cheat and defraud the said Grady Blackstone and R. H. Reid, contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided against the peace and dignity of the State of Oklahoma."

The first proposition presented by the defendant is that the court erred in overruling the motion presented by the defendant for a directed verdict at the close of the state's case. The defendant offered no evidence in his own behalf.

The facts, as shown by the evidence introduced by the state, establish that the defendant Elmer Snider was a resident of Hollis, in Harmon County, Oklahoma. That in 1936, he was appointed Highway Maintenance Superintendent by the State Highway Commission, and that he continued to serve as such superintendent until his discharge in March of 1938. That as part of his duties as State Highway Maintenance Superintendent, he had charge of the division which included the State Highways in Jackson, Harmon, and parts of Kiowa, Tillman, and Greer Counties. That the office of the defendant during said time was at Altus, in Jackson County, where all of the records and files of the Highway Department for the district were located.

The manner of paying the employees of the said Highway Department in this said district, at that time, consisted of time cards being made out by the foremen of the various road crews or by Elmer Snider, which said time cards were brought into the District Office. That at the end of the month, the clerk in the office made out a pay roll sheet from these said time cards whereon was reflected the name of each individual who was supposed to have worked for the month, the number of hours he worked, the rate of pay he was to receive, and then the total. On the extreme right side of said pay roll was a space to be signed by each claimant or workman.

On the bottom of each sheet of the pay roll a blank was provided whereby Elmer Snider, as Maintenance Superintendent, signed and certified under oath that he personally knew that each of the above claimants had worked, and should be paid the amount as designated, and also a place where as a Notary Public, the said Elmer Snider certified that each of the above claimants had signed said pay roll and had subscribed to same in his presence, and he signed and attached his seal thereto. These pay rolls were then forwarded by the Maintenance Superintendent to the Highway Divisional Office at Clinton, Oklahoma, and from there they went to the State Highway Department in Oklahoma City, then to the State Auditor and State Treasurer for payment by State Warrants. There was usually some thirty to sixty days' delay from the time the pay rolls were made up until the state warrants thereon were issued and delivered to the workmen. That these state warrants would come back the same route the pay roll traveled by being sent to the Divisional Highway Office, at Clinton, Oklahoma, and then they were either delivered to the State Maintenance Superintendent, Elmer Snider, in person when he was in Clinton, or would be mailed or forwarded to him to his office at Altus, Oklahoma. That the superintendent then distributed the warrants to his workmen.

Many of the highway employees, who disliked to wait the thirty or sixty days before securing their warrants, had adopted the practice, which was common over the state, of borrowing money on their work time during the current month that they had worked. That one R. H. Reid of Altus had a business of lending money to State Highway employees by accepting assignments of their work time and discounting their claims five per cent. The employee in such case would issue an assignment in favor of the said R. H. Reid in the amount of his wages due and authorize the Highway Maintenance Department to deliver his check to the said R. H. Reid, and authorize Reid to endorse his warrant in the borrower's name and cash the same. Reid kept a full set of books on these transactions. He would advance money based upon lists of employees' names, which would either be signed by the defendant or by the clerk in the Highway Maintenance office, certifying that said person had actually worked and had money coming to him from the Highway Department. Reid would then issue his personal check, drawn on the Altus National Bank, on his special account therein, payable to the individual employee affected in the respective amount which he had borrowed from Reid on his work time. The defendant was acquainted with this condition, and on several occasions took these applications for loans to Reid's office, and would get Reid's personal check therefor. At the end of the month, the state warrants of the borrowers would then be delivered to Reid; that he might be paid for the money which he advanced, plus the five per cent. interest charge he made.

The basis for the particular charge out of which this information was filed was that R. H. Reid had made a check payable to one J. H. Ready, who was purportedly an employee of the Highway Department for the defendant's...