State v. Simpson

Decision Date21 February 1906
Docket Number20,703
Citation76 N.E. 1005,166 Ind. 211
PartiesThe State v. Simpson et al
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

Original Opinion of January 9, 1906, Reported at: 166 Ind 211.


Montgomery, J.

Counsel for appellees earnestly insists that the charge in this case does not show with required certainty that the person intended to be defrauded is the one whose name is alleged to have been forged; and, in support of this contention, cites Shinn v. State (1877), 57 Ind. 144, and Yount v. State (1878), 64 Ind. 443.

In the first case mentioned the accused was charged with having uttered a forged note purporting to have been executed by "S. B. Skinner," with intent to defraud "one Solomon B. Skinner," and upon appeal this court said "It can not be inferred, either as a matter of fact or of law, that Solomon B. Skinner was the person meant or intended by the name 'S. B. Skinner,' which was subscribed to the note on which the charge of forgery was predicated. So far as mere inference can go, and that is all, apparently, that is relied upon in the second count of the indictment, it would be just as reasonable to infer that Stephen, Silas, Solon, Smith, Samuel or Saul B. Skinner was the person meant or intended by the name, 'S. B. Skinner,' as to infer that Solomon B. Skinner was the person thereby meant and intended. Such a matter as this ought not, in our opinion, to be left to mere inference in an indictment."

In the case of Yount v. State, supra, the defendant was charged with having forged a note payable to "E. J. Schweitzer" and having the indorsement "E. J. Sweitzer," with intent to defraud one "Emily J. Schweitzer," and this court, upon the authority of the case of Shinn v. State, supra, held the indictment insufficient.

It is a well-settled principle of criminal pleading, that the full Christian and surname of persons mentioned should be given, unless the same are averred to be unknown. Gardner v. State (1853), 4 Ind. 632; Zellers v. State (1856), 7 Ind. 659; Gordon v. State (1877), 59 Ind. 75; Burton v. State (1881), 75 Ind. 477. It is evident that the decision in the cases cited in behalf of appellees rested primarily, if not wholly, upon that principle; and, consequently, it was held that the identity of persons was not sufficiently shown in the indictment by the use merely of initial letters of the Christian name.

The charge in the case under consideration is wholly different. In the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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