State v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 17 November 1915
• Docket Number: 3715.
• Citation: 153 P. 275,51 Mont. 387
• Parties: STATE v. TAYLOR.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

153 P. 275

51 Mont. 387

STATE v. TAYLOR.

No. 3715.

Supreme Court of Montana

November 17, 1915

Appeal from District Court, Silver Bow County; Michael Donlan Judge.

H. F Taylor was convicted of obtaining money by false pretenses and he appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions to discharge defendant.

Nolan & Donovan, of Butte, for appellant.

J. B Poindexter, Atty. Gen., and C. S. Wagner, of Helena, for the State.

SANNER J.

H. F. Taylor appeals from a judgment of conviction, after verdict, and from an order denying him a new trial. The basis of the judgment is the charge, elaborately set forth in the information, to the effect that the appellant feloniously obtained certain moneys from one Ethel Schad by willfully and falsely pretending and representing to her:

"That he was the owner of a stock of merchandise, two sewing machines, and tools for carrying on and conducting the business of manufacturing corsets, and that he was the owner of and had a corset trade extending throughout the states of Montana, Arizona, and California, and that his stock of merchandise and corset trade and corset business was worth the sum of three thousand ($3,000) dollars, and that he represented to the said Ethel Schad that he would sell a one-half interest in the stock of merchandise and his corset trade and business to, and take the said Ethel Schad as an equal partner in the business for the sum of fifteen hundred ($1,500) dollars; whereas in truth and in fact the said H. F. Taylor did not have any and was not the owner of any corset trade or business, and that the stock of merchandise, two sewing machines, and tools were not worth more than four hundred ($400) dollars, as he, the said H. F. Taylor, then and there well knew."

Fifty alleged errors are assigned. They present the sufficiency of the evidence and various questions of practice; but the view which must be taken of the former, renders it unnecessary to consider the latter, further than to say that some of these assignments have merit, though for the most part they are unsubstantial.

It may be acknowledged at the outset that, according to this record the appellant appears to be an undesirable citizen, and this fact, coupled with an obvious reluctance on his part to meet the charge against him, doubtless accounts for his conviction. The prosecution, however, was for a violation of section 8683, Revised Codes, and, to support it, evidence of the falsity of the representations charged was indispensable. According to the information, these representations or pretenses were false, not because the appellant had inordinately exaggerated the value of his corset business and equipment, but because he had no corset business at all. The...