TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Jernigan v. State

W. L. Jernigan, in Error v. The State of Florida, in Error

Jernigan v. State, 90 So. 699 (Fla. 1922)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 23, 1922
Judges
Browne, Ctjriam, Ellis, Tatlor, West, Whitfield
Citations
90 So. 69983 Fla. 74
Disposition
Judgment reversed.
Syllabus
Where an indictment charges a forgery “with intent to injure and defraud F. and some other person or persons to the grand jurors unknown,” and the proof shows that F. had no interest in and could not have been injured or defrauded by the'forgery, and no intent to injure any other person is shown, a judgment of conviction will be reversed.
Summary
A writ of Error to a Judgment of the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County; .A. G. Campbell, Judge.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Ctjriam

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Ctjriam.

The. indictment herein charges that the alleged forgery, by endorsement of a county warrant that was payable to Henry.Farrington, who had been employed by the accused to work for the county on the public roads, was committed or uttered by the accused “with intent to injure and defraud Henry Farrington and some person or persons to the grand jurors unknown.” The proofs show that the endorsement by the accused of Farrington’s name on the warrant, gnd the.collection of the money could not have injured Farrington, since the accused had before the warrant was issued paid Farrington all the county owed him and no intent to injure any other person is shown. If the warrant was at the instance of the defendant drawn for an amount in excess of the county’s indebtedness to Farrington, proof thereof would not sustain the charge as made. For the failure to prove an essential element of the oflense as alleged, the judgment must be and is hereby reversed.

Browne, C. J., and Tatlor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1923: 119232026peak 1923 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Akin v. State98 So. 609 (Fla. 1923)

Most recent

  1. Akin v. State98 So. 609 (Fla. 1923)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list