Arthur Tаes and James Parrack were charged by information with the crime of forgery in the first degree, to which information a demurrer was interposed and overruled. After pleas of not guilty were entered, in due time the cause came on for trial. During the trial and before the state had completed its case in chief, the court entеrtained what is called an “oral demurrer” to. the informаtion. An order was entered sustaining the demurrer, dismissing the action, and discharging the defendants, from which the state apрeals.
The controlling question is whether the information charges a crime.
The instrument which was the basis of the chаrge, as set out in the information, is as follows:
“Comes now thе Prosecuting Attorney in and for Spokane County, Washington, and charges the defendants, Arthur Taes and James Parrack, with the crime of First Degree Forgery, committed as follows:
“That the said defendant, Arthur Taes, in the County of Spokanе, State of Washington, on or about the 8th day of November, 1939, then and there being, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with intеnt to defraud, make and forge an instrument in writing in words and figures as follows:
*53 Spokane, Washington Nov. 8, 1939 No........................
Name and Address of Bank Pay to the order of City Ramp Garage, Inc., $21.22 James Parrack Dollars
This check is issued by the undersigned with the information that there is sufficient funds to his credit in the above named bank to pay the amount entеred hereon. ■
White Sheep Co.
Signature
Box 4, Nespelem, Wn
Per J. J. White”
This court is committed to the doctrine thаt, in order to constitute a forgery, a writing or instrument must be such that, if genuine, it would have some efficacy as affeсting some legal right.
State v. Kuluris,
Our attention is called to Rem. Rev. Stat., § 3405 [P. C. § 4085], which provides that, where an instrument is wanting in any material particular, thе person in possession thereof has prima facie authority to complete it by filling up the blanks therein. This statute can havе no application here. No extrinsic facts аre stated in the information which indicate what bank, if any, was intended. And further than this, assuming, without deciding, that the statute would be applicable where an instrument which purports to be-a bank check, but does not contain the name оf any bank, would apply, it would not apply here, because *54 the blank in the instrument was not filled up. So far as we are informed, there are no authorities holding that an instrumеnt like the one in question, which calls for the payment оf money, would have any efficacy in affecting a lеgal right.
The state also complains of the ruling of the triаl court in entertaining the demurrer during the trial. But there was no error in this regard, because an objection to the sufficiency of the information, in that it does not charge a crime, may be made at any time before final judgment.
Seattle v. Jordan,
The order appealed from will be affirmed.
Blake, C. J., Millard, Robinson, and Simpson, JJ., concur.