State v. Gordon

• Decision Date: 09 November 1895
• Docket Number: 10130
• Citation: 56 Kan. 64,42 P. 346
• Parties: THE STATE OF KANSAS v. GEORGE GORDON
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

42 P. 346

56 Kan. 64

THE STATE OF KANSAS v. GEORGE GORDON

No. 10130

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 9, 1895

Appeal from Shawnee District Court.

AN information was filed in the district court of Shawnee county, in which it was charged that

"George Gordon, at the county of Shawnee, in the state of Kansas aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this court, on the 30th day of August, 1894, unlawfully, fraudulently, falsely knowingly, designedly and feloniously devising and intending to cheat and defraud one Henry Trenier, did then and there unlawfully, falsely, fraudulently, knowingly, designedly and feloniously pretend and represent to said Henry Trenier that he, the said George Gordon, and an Indian, were the owners and possessors of a certain valuable bar or brick of gold of great value, to wit, of the value of $ 10,000, said gold bar or brick being then and there in Shawnee county, Kansas which said gold bar or gold brick they, the said George Gordon and said Indian, were about to take to the United States mint at Philadelphia, Pa., to be coined into money that said Indian would not allow said gold bar or gold brick to be taken to said mint unless he received a certain sum of money on his interest in said gold bar or gold brick; that if he, the said Henry Trenier, would give to him, the said George Gordon, the sum of $ 1,000 to pay to said Indian on his share in said gold bar or gold brick, he, said George Gordon, would deliver to him, said Henry Trenier, said gold bar or gold brick, to be by him, the said Henry Trenier taken to said United States mint and coined into money, and that he, said Henry Trenier, should have a third interest in the money coined from said gold bar or gold brick, said interest to be of the value of about $ 3,000; which said pretenses were then and there made by the said George Gordon to the said Henry Trenier with the design and for the purpose of inducing the said Henry Trenier to advance and pay him money; and the said Henry Trenier, relying upon and believing said false pretenses and representations to be true, and being deceived thereby, was then and there induced by reason thereof to deliver to said George Gordon the sum of $ 35 lawful money of the United States; by which said false pretenses the said George Gordon, then and there, with intent to cheat and defraud, did unlawfully, fraudulently, feloniously, falsely, knowingly and designedly obtain of the said Henry Trenier, and of the! money and personal property of said Henry Trenier, $ 35 lawful money of the United States of America, the kind, number, denominations and amounts of which are to this affiant unknown, and a more particular description of which this affiant is unable to give, of the value of $ 35; whereas, in truth and in fact, each and all of the said representations were false and fraudulent, and the said George Gordon knew them to be false and fraudulent at the time he so made them to said Henry Trenier; and whereas, in truth and in fact, the said George Gordon and said Indian were not the owners and possessors of a certain valuable brick or bar of gold, of great value, and said gold brick or gold bar was not then and there in Shawnee county, Kansas; and whereas, in truth and in fact, said George Gordon and said Indian were not about to take said gold bar or gold brick to the United States mint at Philadelphia, Pa., to be coined into money, all of which the said George Gordon then and there well knew; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state of Kansas."

A motion by the defendant to quash the information was overruled, and upon a trial a verdict of guilty was rendered. The judgment of the court was imprisonment in the penitentiary at hard labor for a term of five years, and from this judgment the defendant appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Waters & Waters, and W. C. Webb, for appellant.

F. B. Dawes, attorney general, H. C. Safford, county attorney, and A. J. McCabe, for The State.

JOHNSTON J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, J.:

The substantial charge upon which a conviction was obtained was that Gordon unlawfully obtained from Trenier the sum of $ 35 by falsely and fraudulently pretending that Gordon and an Indian owned and then had in their possession in Shawnee county a gold brick or bar of the value of $ 10,000, when in truth and in fact they did not own or possess such gold brick or bar. Some matters are alleged in the information relative to the future actions and conduct of the parties, and it is argued that these do not amount to false pretenses within the statute, and, as these were the main representations in the information, that no crime was charged. As will be seen, however, the substantial features of the charge were representations and assurances of present existing facts, viz., that Gordon and the Indian were then the owners and possessors of a valuable gold brick, which they then had in Shawnee county, and that they were then on their road to take the gold brick to the United States mint at Philadelphia to be coined. It is alleged that on the faith of these representations and the assurance of those facts the money was obtained from Trenier. The mere fact that a false pretense of an existing or past fact is accompanied by...