71 P. 649 | Cal. | 1903
The defendant was convicted of the crime of obtaining money under false pretenses. He appeals from the judgment and from an order denying him a new trial, and also attempts to appeal from an order denying his motion in arrest of judgment, which attempt may be here disregarded, as no appeal from an order of the last-named character finds any warrant under our Penal Code.
The only point made for reversal is to the effect that the information fails to charge an offense. The crime of which the defendant is convicted is defined in section
1. "There must be an intent to defraud."
2. "There must be actual fraud committed."
3. "False pretenses must be used for the purpose of perpetrating the fraud."
4. "The fraud must be accomplished by means of the false pretenses made use of for the purpose; viz., they must be the cause which induced the owner to part with his property."
We think the information clearly sets forth all the above elements of crime and is good and sufficient as a charge of obtaining money under false pretenses. The appellant does not in his brief put his finger on any defect in the information, but contents himself with stating a portion thereof, and then says: "Then follow the usual allegations in false-pretense cases."
We also think that the information contains the allegations usual in "false-pretense cases," and advise that the judgment and order denying a new trial be affirmed.
Haynes, C., and Smith, C., concurred.
For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment and order denying a new trial are affirmed.
*530Van Dyke, J., Angellotti, J., Shaw, J.