State v. Martin
| Decision Date | 02 December 1912 |
| Citation | 167 Mo. App. 346,151 S.W. 504 |
| Parties | STATE v. MARTIN. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
FALSE PRETENSES (§ 12) — ELEMENTS OF OFFENSE — OBTAINING PROPERTY.
An essential of the offense of obtaining property under false pretenses, denounced by Rev. St. 1909, § 4565, is that the person defrauded has parted with something of value as the result of the false pretenses; and a debtor who obtains a credit by means of an order drawn on a third person, not indebted to him, does not obtain property or anything of value, and is not guilty of the offense.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Howell County; W. N. Evans, Judge.
A. E. Martin was indicted for obtaining property under false pretenses. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the indictment, the State appeals. Affirmed.
Will H. D. Green, of West Plains, for the State. J. L. Van Wormer, of West Plains, for respondent.
The prosecuting attorney filed an information charging defendant with the offense of obtaining property under false pretenses. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the information, and the state appealed.
The information charges that defendant was indebted to the Kilpatric Mercantile Company in the sum of $109.35, and in order to secure a credit of $20 on this account he falsely represented that one A. J. Rhodes was indebted to him in the sum of $20 and defendant then gave to the Kilpatric Mercantile Company an order upon Rhodes for $20, and thereby induced the mercantile company to give him a credit of $20 upon his account with them. Does this conduct on the part of defendant constitute a crime under the statute?
The statute (section 4565, Stat. 1909) is as follows: "Every person who with intent to cheat or defraud any other shall designedly * * * by * * * false pretense obtain * * * from any person any money, personal property, right in action or other valuable thing or effects whatsoever * * *" — shall be punished, etc. The question for our determination is whether obtaining credit on an account is obtaining property or thing of value. We do not think so. The entry by the mercantile company of a credit of $20 on the account of defendant with them on their books did not operate as a payment; hence defendant obtained nothing by the transaction, nor did the mercantile company part with any goods or property, or anything of value. If Rhodes was not indebted to defendant, and the order upon him by defendant was worthless for that reason, the parties were left in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Beemer
...by deceit, State v. Fenner, 358 S.W.2d 867, 873(10) (Mo.1962); State v. Weiler, 338 S.W.2d 878, 880(2) (Mo.1960); State v. Martin, 167 Mo.App. 346, 347, 151 S.W. 504 (1912), but that general principle has no application here. The Kinneys' duty to pay the defendant was expressly conditioned ......
- State v. Martin