State v. Robington

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
Writing for the CourtBefore BROWN; O'SULLIVAN
Citation137 Conn. 140,75 A.2d 394
PartiesSTATE v. ROBINGTON. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
Decision Date25 July 1950

Page 394

75 A.2d 394
137 Conn. 140
STATE

v.
ROBINGTON.
Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.
July 25, 1950.

[137 Conn. 141]

Page 395

Theodore E. Steiber, Bridgeport, Richard I. Steiber, Bridgeport, for appellant.

Lorin W. Willis, Bridgeport, Otto J. Saur, Bridgeport, for appellee.

Before [137 Conn. 140] BROWN, C. J., and JENNINGS, BALDWIN, INGLIS and O'SULLIVAN, JJ.

[137 Conn. 141] O'SULLIVAN, Judge.

The defendant has appealed from a judgment based upon a finding of guilt on the first and third counts of an information. The former charged her with committing the crime of obtaining money under false pretenses in that 'on or about the 23rd day of June, 1948, * * * the said Margaret Robington * * * did obtain from one I. Chauncey Lawis * * * the sum of $600.00 in cash and $3000.00 in property, by false and fraudulent representations and pretenses that she, the said Margaret Robington would use said money for the purchase of a Cadillac automobile for the said I. Chauncey Lewis, * * * contrary to the * * * statute.' The assignment of error addressed to this count attacks the finding and conclusion of

Page 396

the court, but the ultimate question is presented by her claim that she could not, upon all of the evidence, properly be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Zukauskas, 132 [137 Conn. 142] Conn. 450, 453, 45 A.2d 289; State v. Cots, 126 Conn. 48, 53, 9 A.2d 138.

This assignment of error goes to the root of the criminal accusation. It raises the query whether any false pretenses were either charged or established. The state claimed a conviction under General Statutes, § 8696. This reads, in part: 'Obtaining money under false pretenses. Any person who shall, by any false token, pretense or device, obtain from another any valuable thing' shall be punished. The information does not allege a crime under this statute.

The charge is that the defendant falsely represented that she 'would use' Lewis' money to purchase a Cadillac automobile for him. The court could reasonably have found this to be so. The statutory crime which the count purported to allege, however, is committed only when the false pretenses by which money or property is obtained relate to a past or an existing fact. People v. Karp, 298 N.Y. 213, 216, 81 N.E.2d 817; Hameyer v. State, 148 Neb. 798, 801, 29 N.W.2d 458; State v. Shevlin, 81 N.H. 121, 123 A. 233; 2 Wharton, Criminal Law, 12th Ed., p. 1731. A false pretense is 'a representation of some fact or circumstance calculated to mislead, which is not true.' State v. Penley, 27 Conn. 587, 591. A mere promise to do an act, even though the promisor has, at the time, no intention of keeping it, is not such a pretense or device as to come within the Statute against False Pretenses. Chaplin v. United States, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 80, 157 F.2d 697, 698, 168 A.L.R. 828; Pierce v. State, 226 Ind. 312, 317, 79 N.E.2d 903; Harris v. State, 125 Ohio St. 257, 260, 181 N.E. 104; Ballaine v. District Court, 107 Utah 247, 252, 153 P.2d 265; 22 Am.Jur. 452, § 14; Note, 168 A.L.R....

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • State v. Nardini
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 13, 1982
    ...At one time this court took the view that the age of a conviction "went to its weight, not to its admissibility." State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 145, 75 A.2d 394 (1950). More recently we have indicated that remoteness in time, like relevance of the crime to veracity, is a factor to be w......
  • State v. Cooper, No. 14223
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • August 24, 1993
    ...its admissibility and routinely allowed the evidence, as the trial court had done in State v. Robington,[227 Conn. 434] 37 Conn. 140, 145, 75 A.2d 394 (1950), a case decided before Nardini that required a balancing of prejudice and probative value. We Nardini was the only case cited as pert......
  • State v. Vars
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • November 29, 1966
    ...the owner of his property.' State v. Rapsey, 115 Conn. 540, 542, 162 A. 262; State v. Fenn, 41 Conn. 590, 605.' State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 143, 75 A.2d 394, 396; see State v. Reynolds, 95 Conn. 186, 191, 193, 110 A. 844; State v. Levine, 79 Conn. 714, 717, 66 A. 529, 10 L.R.A.,N.S.,......
  • State v. Pikul
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • December 4, 1962
    ...on an offer by the state. See General Statutes § 52-145; State v. Van Allen, 140 Conn. 39, 41, 97 A.2d 890; State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 144, 75 A.2d 394; State v. Palko, 121 Conn. 669, 667, 186 A. 657. In the present case, to convict the defendant, the state first had to establish a ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • State v. Nardini
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 13, 1982
    ...At one time this court took the view that the age of a conviction "went to its weight, not to its admissibility." State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 145, 75 A.2d 394 (1950). More recently we have indicated that remoteness in time, like relevance of the crime to veracity, is a factor to be w......
  • State v. Cooper, No. 14223
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • August 24, 1993
    ...its admissibility and routinely allowed the evidence, as the trial court had done in State v. Robington,[227 Conn. 434] 37 Conn. 140, 145, 75 A.2d 394 (1950), a case decided before Nardini that required a balancing of prejudice and probative value. We Nardini was the only case cited as pert......
  • State v. Vars
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • November 29, 1966
    ...the owner of his property.' State v. Rapsey, 115 Conn. 540, 542, 162 A. 262; State v. Fenn, 41 Conn. 590, 605.' State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 143, 75 A.2d 394, 396; see State v. Reynolds, 95 Conn. 186, 191, 193, 110 A. 844; State v. Levine, 79 Conn. 714, 717, 66 A. 529, 10 L.R.A.,N.S.,......
  • State v. Pikul
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • December 4, 1962
    ...on an offer by the state. See General Statutes § 52-145; State v. Van Allen, 140 Conn. 39, 41, 97 A.2d 890; State v. Robington, 137 Conn. 140, 144, 75 A.2d 394; State v. Palko, 121 Conn. 669, 667, 186 A. 657. In the present case, to convict the defendant, the state first had to establish a ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT