State v. Gross
| Decision Date | 16 December 1884 |
| Citation | 21 N.W. 802,62 Wis. 41 |
| Parties | STATE v. GROSS. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, La Crosse county.H. W. Chynoweth, Asst. Atty. Gen., and J. J. Fruit, for plaintiff.
John A. Daniels, for defendant.
The defendant was tried in the circuit court of La Crosse county on an information charging him with the crime of obtaining money by false pretenses, and was convicted. The questions we are asked to determine are brought here by the report of the circuit judge before whom the defendant was tried, pursuant to Rev. St. § 4721. The questions are inartificially and somewhat obscurely stated in the report, but, as we understand them, they are: (1) Does the information charge a criminal offense? and, if so, (2) does the evidence support the conviction? The report contains the information, the evidence on the part of the state, and the charge of the judge to the jury.
1. The information charges in substance that on November 5, 1883, at the city of La Crosse, the defendant falsely pretended to one Frank Thayer that he was a contractor, engaged in the business of teaming at Stevens' Point, in this state, and desired to employ teamsters to work for him at that place during the following winter; that he made certain other false pretenses, specified in the information, to Thayer, to satisfy the latter of the truth of such statements, and proposed to employ Thayer to go to Stevens' Point and work for him as a teamster; that thereupon Thayer engaged to do so; that Gross then falsely pretended that he had not sufficient money to pay Thayer's railroad fare to Stevens' Point, and desired Thayer to advance him a sufficient amount to purchase the necessary railroad ticket, and agreed to return the money when Thayer should reach Stevens' Point; that thereupon Thayer advanced him eight dollars for that purpose. The information specifically alleges that each and all such pretenses were false, to the knowledge of the defendant, and were so made with intent to defraud; but that Thayer believed them to be true and advanced the money on the faith of them. This information undoubtedly charges a criminal offense under section 4423, Rev. St. This is perfectly obvious from a perusal of the information, and no discussion can make it plainer. The information is admirably well drawn, and reflects credit upon the district attorney who drew it. The first question submitted must therefore be answered in the affirmative.
2. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Juneau
...here. That is a question of fact. Only questions of law are to be reported, under the statute, or considered by this court. State v. Gross, 62 Wis. 41, 21 N. W. 802;State v. Cornhauser, 74 Wis. 42, 41 N. W. 959. The court, being satisfied of the competency of the witness, did not err in per......
-
State v. Heiden
...by the trial court before ruling upon the admissibility of the book entry, and cannot be certified under this statute. State v. Gross, 62 Wis. 41, 21 N. W. 802;State v. Juneau, 88 Wis. 180, 59 N. W. 580, 24 L. R. A. 857, 43 Am. St. Rep. 877. 5. The fifth question is in disobedience of the r......
-
State v. Konkol
...trial and consent to a trial by the court. State v. Kneifle et al., 12 Wis. 439;State v. Parish and Nichols, 42 Wis. 625;State v. Gross, 62 Wis. 41, 21 N.W. 802;State v. Wentler, 76 Wis. 89, 44 N.W. 841, 45 N.W. 816;State v. Kaiser et al., 214 Wis. 44, 252 N.W. 273. [2][3] We conclude that ......
-
State v. Cornhauser
...entire record, which we decline to do. The rule on this subject is laid down in State v. Jenkins, 60 Wis. 599, 19 N. W. Rep. 406;State v. Gross, 62 Wis. 41, 21 N. W. Rep. 802; and State v. Clifford, 58 Wis. 114, 16 N. W. Rep. 25. The cause must be remanded to the municipal court of Milwauke......