Turnipseed v. State
Decision Date | 10 February 1903 |
Parties | TURNIPSEED v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Walton County; Lucius J. Reeves, Judge.
W. D Turnipseed was convicted of forgery, and brings error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
1. Although our statute defining forgery uses the language 'whoever falsely makes, alters, forges or counterfeits,' yet it is well settled that, while it is usual in indictments for the crime to aver that the defendant 'did falsely forge and counterfeit,' still it is sufficient to allege that he 'forged and counterfeited,' since the adverb 'falsely' is sufficiently implied in the words 'forged' and 'counterfeited.'
2. Where the alleged forgery of an instrument consists in an alteration of it, the alteration must be material, so as to change, modity, or alter the obligations imposed by the instrument; otherwise it creates no falsity in the seeming legal efficacy of the writing, and there is no forgery.
COUNSEL Daniel Campbell, for plaintiff in error.
William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The plaintiff in error was indicted, tried, and convicted of the crime of forgery in the circuit court of Walton county, and seeks reversal here of the judgment and sentence pronounced by writ of error.
The indictment upon which he was tried is as follows:
--He the said William Turnipseed, then and there having said writing obligatory in his possession, did then and there in Walton county, State of Florida, on the 1st day of March, A. D. 1901, feloniously make, alter forge and counterfeit the said writing obligatory by then and there falsely obliterating and defacing the words 'with the exception of six days work' in said writing obligatory, and inserting therein in place of the words 'with the exception of six days work' the words 'labor or material furnished by W. D. Turnipseed' which said writing obligatory, as falsely forged and altered, was then in words and figures as follows, to-wit: 'I, M. M. Owens, do lease unto W. D. Turnipseed my mother's farm in the county of Walton, State of Florida, situated on White creek near the valley church for a term of three years commencing Jany. 1st, 1901, for the sum of $150.00 or its equivalent, to be paid as follows: four thousand (4000) good rails are to be split and put up the first year by W. D. Turnipseed, in which I am to allow $40.00 on towards the rent for the 4000 rails, when split and put up on said farm where they are the greatest needed, and if 4000 rails are not enough to fix a good fence on said farm, I, M. M. Owens, do promise to have enough rails split to make a fence strong enough to keep stock out of said farm; and that W. D. Turnipseed does further agree to help build a house on said farm to live in, labor or material furnished by W. D. Turnipseed, which is to be paid for by M. M. Owens, when said house is complete with the exception of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Uhler
...statute, Comp. Laws 1913, § 10685. Baldwin v. State, 46 Fla. 115, 35 So. 220; State v. Griffin, 79 Iowa 568, 44 N.W. 813; Turnipseed v. State, 45 Fla. 110, 33 So. 851; Gillotti v. State, 135 Wis. 634, 116 N.W. 252. State v. Fordham, 13 N.D. 494--500, 101 N.W. 888, it is stated: "In this con......
-
Akin v. State
... ... necessary to allege that the offense was feloniously ... committed. [86 Fla. 569] The order overruling the motion to ... quash and the motion in arrest of judgment was not error ... Smith v. State, 29 Fla. 408, 10 So. 894; King v ... State, 43 Fla. 211, 31 So. 254; Turnipseed v ... State, 45 Fla. 110, 33 So. 851; Miller v ... State, 71 Fla. 338, 71 So. 280; Jernigan v ... State, 83 Fla. 74, 90 So. 699; Poage v. State, ... 3 Ohio St. 229; 12 R. C. L. 141; 26 C.J. § 16, p. 921; ... United States v. Jolly (D. C.) 37 F. 108; Fry v ... State. 78 Tex. Cr. R. 435, ... ...
-
State v. Uhler
...statute, section 10685, C. L. 1913; Baldwin v. State, 46 Fla. 115, 35 South. 220;State v. Griffin, 79 Iowa, 568, 44 N. W. 813;Turnipseed v. State, 45 Fla. 110, 33 South. 851;Gillotti v. State, 135 Wis. 634, 116 N. W. 252. In State v. Fordham, 13 N. D. 494-500, 101 N. W. 888, it is stated: “......
-
Baldwin v. State
... ... or expose him after conviction or acquittal to substantial ... danger of a new prosecution for the same offense.' A ... similar indictment was held good in Iowa, in the absence of ... such statute. See State v. Griffin, 79 Iowa, 568, 44 ... N.W. 813. See, also, Turnipseed v. State, 45 Fla ... ----, 33 So. 851 ... There ... is no merit in the contention that the information should ... allege the kind of money in which the property was valued ... The charge is not for the larceny of 'money,' and the ... addition of the words 'lawful money of the ... ...