State v. Hill
| Decision Date | 24 May 1881 |
| Citation | 72 Me. 238 |
| Parties | STATE v. LIVING L. HILL. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
ON EXCEPTIONS from superior court, Cumberland.
The grand jurors for said State, upon their oath, present, that Living L. Hill of Saco, in the county of York, on the twenty-eighth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, at Portland, in the county of Cumberland, unlawfully, knowingly and designedly did falsely pretend to one John L. Best, that he, the said Living L. Hill was then and there the owner of certain real estate situated in said Saco, being the same premises upon which he, the said Living L. Hill, then lived; that the said real estate was then, on said twenty-eighth day of August aforesaid, free and clear of all encumbrances and the same was not mortgaged to any person; and that no person then had the scratch of a pen against the said real estate.
The said real estate being described as follows: A certain lot of land containing ten acres and being the same premises which were conveyed to the said Living L. Hill by one Charles F Hill by deed dated August 1, A. D. 1877; also another lot of land being the same which was conveyed to said Living L. Hill by one Stephen A. Haines by deed dated March 23, A. D. 1878 with intent thereby, then and there on said twenty-eighth day of August, A. D. 1879, at Portland aforesaid, to induce the said John L. Best to sell and deliver to him the said Living L. Hill certain goods, chattels and property of him the said John L. Best, to wit: One horse, and to take in part payment therefor his the said Living L. Hill's promissory note for the sum of one hundred seventeen dollars and seventy-five cents, dated on said twenty-eighth day of August, A. D. 1879 and payable to the order of said John L. Best, in three months from the date thereof, at National Traders Bank Portland, and with intent thereby then and there on the said twenty-eighth day of August, A. D. 1879, at Portland, aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, to cheat and defraud the said John L. Best of his said horse, and by means of said false pretences the said Living L. Hill did then and there induce the said John L. Best to sell and deliver to him the said Living L. Hill, the said horse, and to take in part payment therefor, his the said Living L. Hill's promissory note for the said sum of one hundred seventeen dollars and seventy-five cents, dated on said twenty-eighth day of August, A. D. 1879, and payable to the order of said John L. Best in three months from the date thereof, at National Traders Bank, Portland, and by means of said false pretences the said Living L. Hill did then and there on said twenty-eighth day of August, A. D. 1879, at Portland, aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, designedly obtain from the said John L. Best the said horse of the value of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, of the goods, chattels and property of the said John L. Best, with intent then and there to cheat and defraud the said John L. Best of the same, and did then and there cheat and defraud the said John L. Best of the said horse. Whereas in truth and in fact the said Living L. Hill was not then and there the owner of the said real estate, and the said real estate was not then free and clear of all encumbrances, and the said real estate was then mortgaged to a large amount to wit: the sum of fifteen hundred dollars. All which the said Living L. Hill then and there well knew. To the great damage and deception of the said John L. Best and against the peace of said State, and contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided.
| A true bill, | JAMES N. READ, Foreman. |
| ARDON W. COOMBS, |
| Attorney for the State for said county." |
(Motion in arrest.)
" Cumberland, ss. Superior court, May term, 1880. State v. Living L. Hill:
And now said Living L. Hill comes into court after verdict of ‘ Guilty,’ and before judgment and sentence, and moves the court in arrest of judgment and sentence because he says that no offence is set out in said indictment which he could be legally tried upon.
Because said indictment does not state that said Hill did not pay his said note at the maturity thereof, nor set forth any false statement as to said note given for said horse, nor that said note was not fully what it purported to be, and of the value therein set forth.
Because said verdict was against law and against evidence and the weight of evidence in said case.
H. B. Cleaves, attorney general, and Ardon W. Coombs, county attorney, for the State, cited: Com. v. Coe, 115 Mass. 481; Com. v. Morrill, 8 Cush. 571; State v. Dorr, 33 Me. 498: Pope v. Sully, 1 Buff. (N. Y.) 17; State v. Munday, 78 N.C. 460; McCord v. The People, 46 N.Y. 470; State v. Stanley, 64 Me. 157; Com. v. Tenney, 97 Mass. 50; Com. v. Mason, 105 Mass. 163; State v. Kingsbury, 58 Me. 238; State v. Pike, 65 Me. 111; State v. Watson, 63 Me. 128; State v. Mills, 17 Me. 211; 11 Allen 266; 19 Pick. 179; 126 Mass. 208; Com. v. Strain, 10 Met. 521; State v. Smith, 54 Me. 33; State v. Gilman, 70 Me. 329.
A. F. Moulton and S. W. Luques, for the respondent.
The indictment does not set out and we fail to comprehend how the false statement of Hill, as to the condition of the title to his farm, tended to the injury of Best, or how the fact that the farm was incumbered tended to defraud him of his horse.
He sold Hill the horse and took his note and the indictment is silent as to whether the note had been paid.
The indictment does not allege that Best believed the representations and was deceived.
" This statute offense is undoubtedly a very great extension of the criminal court and a party may well insist at least upon all the usual and customary requisites to a valid indictment. It must set out all the material facts and circumstances which the prosecutor is bound to prove. Com. v. Strain, 10 Met. 522; see People v. Tomkins, 1 Park 224; People v. Miller, 2 Park 197; 4, Bishop Criminal Law, § 462; People v. Herrick, 13 Wend. 87; People v. Stetson, 4 Barb. 151.
The requested instructions should have been given.
A party is bound to exercise ordinary prudence. That in this case required Best to examine the record. People v. Williams, 4 Hill 9; People v. Stetson, 4 Barb. 151; People v. Sully, 5 Park. 142; Thomas v. People, 34 N.Y. 351; Com. v. Hulbert, 12 Met. 446; Regina v. Mills, 40 Eng. L. & Eq. 562; Com. v. Norton, 11 Allen 267.
If Hill intended to pay his note at the time he gave it, and he gave it in payment of the horse, how can it be said that he intended to defraud Best of his horse? We insist that his intention at the time in regard to paying the note should have been submitted to the jury.
The defendant has been indicted, tried, and convicted of fraudulently obtaining possession of a horse, by a purchase on credit, by falsely pretending that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Starr
...not so absurd and irrational that Robinson had no right to rely thereon. State v. Martin, 226 Mo. 539; State v. Keyes, 196 Mo. 136; State v. Hill, 72 Me. 238; Thomas People, 113 Ill. 531; State v. Munday, 78 N.C. 460; Watson v. People, 87 N.Y. 566. The indictment sufficiently charges that a......
-
Smith v. State
...any incumbrance, it is no defense that the party deceived relied upon the statements made, without examining the public records. State v. Hill, 72 Me. 238; Thomas v. People, 113 Ill. 531; Miller People, 22 Colo. 530, 45 P. 408; State v. Munday, 78 N.C. 460; Jenkins v. State, 97 Ala. 66, 12 ......
-
Moore v. State
...case, have been approved. State v. Snyder (1879), 66 Ind. 203; Ex parte Reggel (1885), 114 U.S. 642, 5 S.Ct. 1148, 29 L.Ed. 250; State v. Hill (1881), 72 Me. 238; State v. Feazell (1895), 132 Mo. 176, S.W. 788; State v. Mangum (1895), 116 N.C. 998, 21 S.E. 189; Norris v. State (1874), 25 Oh......
-
State v. Keyes
...put upon his inquiry as to a motive which was within the knowledge of the defendant, and as to which he himself knew nothing." In State v. Hill, 72 Me. 238, the defendant was indicted, tried, and convicted of fraudulently obtaining possession of a horse by purchase on credit, by false prete......