State v. Palmer
Decision Date | 05 January 1889 |
Citation | 20 P. 270,40 Kan. 474 |
Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS v. G. C. PALMER |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Finney District Court.
PROSECUTION for obtaining money under false pretenses. At the May term 1888, the defendant Palmer was found guilty, and sentenced to two years in the penitentiary. He appeals. The opinion states the facts.
Judgment affirmed.
A. J Hoskinson, for appellant.
S. B Bradford, attorney general, for The State; Irwin Taylor, of counsel.
OPINION
This was a criminal prosecution in the district court of Finney county upon the following indictment, (omitting title and signature,) to wit:
Upon this indictment the defendant was tried before the court and a jury, and was found guilty, and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for the term of two years, and from this sentence he now appeals to this court.
I. It is claimed that the indictment is insufficient. Now while it is not as formal in some respects as it might be, yet we think it states an offense. It advised the defendant of everything that he was required to meet, and none of his substantial rights were prejudicially affected by any of the supposed defects of the indictment. Hence under the criminal code we think it was sufficient.
II. It is claimed that the court below erred in adjourning the trial for two days, and in permitting the jury in the meantime to separate. But no such adjournment nor any such separation is shown by the record. But even if the same had been shown, it would still be presumed that the adjournment was for a sufficient reason, and that the court in every respect did all that was proper to be done in the case.
III. It is claimed that the court below erred in calling the jury into court on May 29, 1888, while they were deliberating upon their verdict, and telling them that unless they agreed upon a verdict they would be compelled to stay in the jury-room during May 30, a legal holiday. This was not a material error under the circumstances of this case, for the jury did not render their verdict on May 29 or on May 30, but rendered it on May 31; and whether they remained in the jury-room from May 29 to May 31, or where they were during that time, or when they agreed upon their verdict other than as above stated, is not shown.
IV. Several alleged errors are founded upon the asserted fact that the defendant obtained from Cirtwell a check, and not money. The evidence, however, shows that Cirtwell drew the check for $ 75 in favor of the defendant upon the Bank of Western Kansas, and then went with the defendant to the bank identified him, and the bank...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bartley v. State
...that there was a shortage in his accounts as county treasurer. The proofs were held sufficient to sustain the conviction. State v. Palmer, 40 Kan. 474, 20 P. 270, was prosecution for obtaining moneys under false pretenses. The evidence disclosed that one Critwell drew his check on a certain......
-
Roberts & Schaeffer Company v. Jones
...N.W. 602; 65 F. 433; 115 N.Y. 185; 37 P. 1069; 30 Ark. 472; 148 U.S. 245; 68 F. 446; 40 Me. 446; 22 Ill.App. 637; 70 F. 885; 2 Grat. 594; 40 Kan. 474; 7 So. 784. See also, on the proposition that the court remained in session, although no adjourning order was made on January 23rd, 12 S.E. 4......
-
Bartley v. State
...that there was a shortage in his accounts as county treasurer. The proofs were held sufficient to sustain the conviction. State v. Palmer, 40 Kan. 474, 20 Pac. 270, was a prosecution for obtaining moneys under false pretenses. The evidence disclosed that one Critwell drew his check on a cer......
-
State v. Detloff
...154 Cal. 472, 98 P. 194;Hunt v. State, 72 Ark. 241, 79 S. W. 769, 65 L. R. A. 71, 105 Am. St. Rep. 34, 2 Ann. Cas. 33;State v. Palmer, 40 Kan. 474, 20 P. 270;People v. Hoffman, 142 Mich. 531, 105 N. W. 838;State v. Stewart, 9 N. D. 409, 83 N. W. 869;State v. Germain, 54 Or. 395, 103 P. 521;......