State v. Bingham

• Decision Date: 09 February 1909
• Citation: 99 P. 735,51 Wash. 616
• Parties: STATE v. BINGHAM.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

99 P. 735

51 Wash. 616

STATE v. BINGHAM.

Supreme Court of Washington

February 9, 1909

Appeal from Superior Court, Walla Walla County; Thos. H. Brents Judge.

William C. Bingham was convicted of false pretenses, and he appeals. Reversed, with directions to dismiss.

Cain &amp Hurspool, for appellant.

Otto B Rupp and John H. McDonald, for the State.

RUDKIN C.J.

An information was filed in the court below charging the defendant with the crime of obtaining money under false pretenses, committed as follows: 'That the said William C. Bingham on the 6th day of January, 1908, in the county of Walla Walla, then and there being, did willfully, unlawfully feloniously, fraudulently, designedly, and with the intent to defraud one John G. Muntinga and divers other persons to your informant unknown, fraudulently, falsely, and designedly represent to said John G. Muntinga and to A. F. Muntinga, agent of said John G. Muntinga, that he, the said William C. Bingham, was named J. H. Haskell, and that a certain check dated January 6, 1908, drawn on the First National Bank of Walla Walla, in favor of J. H. Haskell and signed by 'L. Youdovitch & Co.' for the sum of $12, was a valid check, and that he, the said defendant, was the owner of the same and had the right to indorse and transfer the said check, and that the indorsement thereon of 'J. H. Haskell' was the indorsement of said defendant; and the said defendant did then and there, by means of said false, fraudulent, and pretended statements and representations, obtain from the said John G. Muntinga the sum of $11 lawful money of the United States, property of the said John G. Muntinga, when in truth and in fact, as the said defendant then and there well knew, his, the said defendant's, name was not J. H. Haskell, and said check was not the property of said defendant, and said defendant did not have the right to indorse the same, and the indorsement, 'J. H. Haskell,' was not the indorsement of the said defendant.' The defendant was convicted before a jury, and from the judgment and sentence of the court this appeal is prosecuted.

The sufficiency of the testimony to sustain the conviction is the only question presented by the appeal. It appears that on the 6th day of January, 1908, the appellant sold a stove, which he had theretofore purchased under contract and not paid for to L. Youdovitch & Co., junk dealers of Walla Walla, for the sum of $12. The purchase...