State v. Roberts

50 P. 1102, 18 Wash. 691, 1897 Wash. LEXIS 180
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Roberts. Read the opinion of the Court — 22 Wash. 1
Washington Supreme Court·Decided October 25, 1897·No. No. 2751·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an indictment for forgery based on the same acts as the information in the case of State v. Barlmloo, just decided, ante, p. 52, excepting that this information charges the uttering by the respondent of the warrant after the name of the payee had been forged thereon, knowing the said indorsement to have been unlawfully and feloniously false and forged, with intent to defraud. Demurrer to the information and motion to quash were interposed in this case and sustained by the court. The state electing to stand upon the information, the respondent was discharged and the state appealed. For the reasons assigned in State v. Barlmloo, supra, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to proceed to a new trial.

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

State v. Roberts, 50 P. 1102, 18 Wash. 691, 1897 Wash. LEXIS 180 (Wash. 1897).

50 P. 1102 (State v. Roberts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.