State v. Entwistle

Superior Court of Rhode Island

State v. Entwistle

2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 45

CourtSuperior Court of Rhode Island

DecidedApril 14, 1919

DocketNo. 10077

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 45 (State v. Entwistle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Entwistle, 2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 45 (R.I. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

DECISION

DORAN, J.

The indictment avers:

1st. Defendant falsely represented that he owned a certain good, valid, outstanding mortgage and note made by Napoleon and Arthamise Aubin and worth $2800;

2nd. That by means of said false statement defendant obtained from Rayner Woodhead n exchange for said Aubin mortgage, a good, valid, outstanding note worth $2800, made by Edward and Amanda Bergeron of the goods, chatels and property of said Woodhead;

3rd. Defendant did not own said Aubin mortgage and knew he did not.

I think it is sufficiently charged that defendant got from Woodhead a note in exchange for something defendant did not own by means of falsely alleging such ownership.

Demurrer overruled.

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