State v. Entwistle

Superior Court of Rhode Island

State v. Entwistle

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

Superior Court of Rhode Island·Decided April 14, 1919·No. No. 10077·Published

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

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.

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

Pincite

2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 45 (State v. Entwistle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.