State v. . Crawford

152 S.E. 504, 198 N.C. 522, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 397
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 26, 1930
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 152 S.E. 504 (State v. . Crawford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. . Crawford, 152 S.E. 504, 198 N.C. 522, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 397 (N.C. 1930).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

A postdated check, given for a past due account, is not a representation, importing criminal liability if untrue, that the drawer has funds or credit in the bank, sufficient to pay the same upon presentation.

*524 The fact tbat the check is postdated would seem to imply no more than that on its date, the drawer will have or expects to have, funds or credit in the bank sufficient to insure its payment at that time. 11 R. O. L., 853. Thus the status of the parties, except for the additional promise represented thereby, would apparently be the same, or remain unchanged, for the time being at least. Under the facts of the present case, therefore, it could hardly be said that the defendant has violated the statute which makes it unlawful for any person, firm or corporation, to issue and deliver to another, any check or draft on any bank or depository, for the payment of money or its equivalent, knowing at the time that the maker or drawer thereof has not sufficient funds on deposit in or credit with such bank or depository with which to pay the same upon presentation. Chapter 62, Public Laws 1927.

It would serve no useful purpose to review the decisions elsewhere (collected in 35 A. L. R., 384), for our statute is specifically directed against the issuance of cheeks or drafts on any bank or depository when the maker or drawer thereof has not sufficient funds on deposit in or credit with such bank or depository with which to pay the same upon presentation. S. v. Yarboro, 194 N. C., 498, 140 S. E., 216. Indeed, a check is defined by C. S., 3167 as “a bill of exchange drawn on a bank payable on demand.” See, also, definition in Trust Co. v. Bank, 166 N. C., 112, 81 S. E., 1074. And it is a rule of universal acceptance that criminal statutes should be strictly construed. S. v. Falkner, 182 N. C., 793, 108 S. E., 756.

No error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gumm v. Heider
348 P.2d 455 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1960)
Ennis v. State
95 So. 2d 20 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
State v. Bruce
262 P.2d 960 (Utah Supreme Court, 1953)
State v. . Campbell
28 S.E.2d 499 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1944)
Cook v. State
94 S.W.2d 386 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1936)
State v. . Tatum
172 S.E. 405 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
State v. . Franklin
167 S.E. 569 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
State v. . Byrd
167 S.E. 626 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
Dickerson v. Atlantic Refining Co.
201 N.C. 90 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Dickerson v. . Refining Co.
159 S.E. 446 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
State v. . Baker
155 S.E. 249 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 S.E. 504, 198 N.C. 522, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-crawford-nc-1930.