State v. Cutts

• Decision Date: 28 June 1913
• Citation: 24 Idaho 329,133 P. 115
• Parties: STATE, Respondent, v. ARTHUR B. CUTTS, Appellant
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

133 P. 115

24 Idaho 329

STATE, Respondent, v. ARTHUR B. CUTTS, Appellant

Supreme Court of Idaho

June 28, 1913

REPORTS OF STATE BANKS-RESPONSIBILITY OF CASHIER FOR REPORTS-DEFENSES-ADMISSIBILITY OF BANK-BOOK ENTRIES-ADMISSIBILITY OF ORAL TESTIMONY RELATING TO CONTENTS OF BOOKS.

1. Where a report purporting to show the true condition of a state bank is prepared in typewritten form ready for the signature of the cashier of the bank, by other officers or clerks, and the cashier thereupon signs said report and delivers it to another person, said cashier has made such report, in contemplation of sec. 7128 of the Revised Codes of Idaho.

2. Where a cashier has voluntarily signed such a report as is referred to in sec. 7128 of the Revised Codes, knowing what it was, such making of said report was "knowingly" done, and he is responsible for the truth of the statements therein, unless he can show that he was himself deceived without undue fault or negligence on his part.

3. It is no defense to an information charging a cashier of a state bank with the making of a false report of its condition for him to plead that he signed the report at the request of a superior officer of such bank, without knowledge or investigation on his part as to the truth of the facts therein stated.

4. Entries in the books of a state bank connected with or related to the portions of a report of the condition of such bank alleged in an information to be false are admissible in evidence against the cashier of such bank who assists in or supervises the keeping of such books, when the cashier is on trial charged with making such false report, without the necessity of any foundation being laid relative to their accuracy.

5. Oral testimony regarding the contents of bank-books is not properly admissible in evidence before the portions of such books connected with the subject of inquiry are identified and admitted in evidence.

6. Evidence in this case examined, and held that there is sufficient competent evidence in the record to sustain the verdict, especially inasmuch as the defendant admits signing the report charged in the information to be false, and evidence to the effect that such report was false is uncontradicted, and it appears clearly that the defendant signed said report without examining it and in entire disregard of whether it was true or false.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District for Blaine County. Hon. E. A. Walters, Judge.

Prosecution for making false report of the conditions of a state bank. Judgment of conviction. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Affirmed.

A. A Fraser, R. M. Angel and W. J. Lamme, for Appellant.

Error was committed by the trial court in permitting expert witnesses to testify as to certain entries made in the books and records of the Idaho State Bank, and in admitting in evidence over objection these books and records. There was no foundation laid for the introduction of these books and records, no evidence was introduced on behalf of the state proving or tending to prove that these books were correctly kept or that the entries were made at the time of the transaction therein set forth, and the person who made the entries was not produced upon the trial to identify the books or testify as to their correctness, and no reason shown why such witnesses were not present. (Phillips v. United States, 201 F. 259, 120 C. C. A. 149; Watrous v Cunningham, 71 Cal. 30, 11 P. 811.)

There was no evidence introduced that the defendant in this case made the false report or any entry therein; the only evidence connecting him with said report was the one fact that his name was signed to the same. This, under the statute, is not sufficient to constitute the making of a false report. (United States v. Booker, 98 F. 291.)

The only evidence produced by the state which tended in the least degree to connect this defendant with said report was the one fact that he had signed it. It might be possible that from the act of signing a report which is false the defendant would be guilty of a misdemeanor, the crime charged in sec 7121, Rev. Codes, to the same extent as a director of a bank would be if he had signed such a report. This is the rule announced by this court in State v. Paulsen, 21 Idaho 686, 123 P. 588; United States v. Potter, 56 F. 83.

The evidence shows that for two months of the period covered by this report defendant was not in the bank, but was absent, acting as cashier of the Camas Prairie Bank; the mere fact that he signed the report under such circumstances is no evidence that he knew of its falsity. (State v. Jackson, 20 S.D. 305, 105 N.W. 742; People v. Helmer, 85 Hun, 530, 33 N.Y.S. 524.)

H. F. Ensign, Prosecuting Attorney, J. H. Peterson, Attorney General, J. J. Guheen and T. C. Coffin, Assistants, for Respondent.

If it is true in every case of this nature, that of making a false report concerning the condition of some corporation, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove the correctness of the accounts kept by the corporation for the purpose of showing the falsity of the report, then sec. 7128, Rev. Codes, is a dead letter, for under such circumstances it is well known that the books are not correctly kept, and it would be impossible to show that the report as made was false. The appellant lays great stress upon the case of Phillips v. United States, 201 F. 259, 120 C. C. A. 149, as bearing out his contention that these books and records were not admissible. We are content, so far as this assignment is concerned, to rest the state's case upon the same authority. (Bacon v. United States, 97 F. 35, 38 C. C. A. 37; Smith v. Moore, 199 F. 689, 118 C. C. A. 127; Foster v. United States, 178 F. 165, 101 C. C. A. 485; United States v. Allen, 47 F. 696.)

The reason appellant was called upon to sign the report was that the bank examiner and the public would know that the statements made in the report were made by a person who knew or was presumed to know the true condition of the bank. There was no other reason for the defendant to sign the report, and such being the case, he can hardly now be heard to claim that he did not know the condition of the bank. (Cooper v. Schlesinger, 111 U.S. 148, 4 S.Ct. 360, 28 L.Ed. 382; State v. Mason, 61 Kan. 102, 58 P. 978.)

DAVIS, District Judge. Ailshie, C. J., and Stewart, J., concur.

OPINION

DAVIS, District Judge.

--This is an action wherein the plaintiff is charged by an information filed in the district court in Blaine county with the crime of making a false report concerning the affairs, financial condition and property of the Idaho State Bank in violation of sec. 7128 of the Revised Codes of Idaho.

On appeal to this court from a verdict and judgment of conviction the defendant relies principally upon the following contentions: That he did not prepare said report or aid in its preparation in any way, but merely signed it at the request of a superior officer of the...