Opinion

Brown v. Commonwealth

  • 656 S.W.2d 727
  • 1983 Ky. LEXIS 298
Court
Kentucky Supreme Court
Filed
Jun 15, 1983
Status
Published
Author
Gant
On the bench
Aker, Gant, Leibson, Stephens, Stephenson, Vance, Wintersheimer
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 20.8%

The opinion

GANT, Justice,

concurring.

I, too, would affirm the conviction herein but do not feel that reliance should remain a necessary element. The standard for conviction in a criminal case was clearly defined in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), citing In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 , 90 S.Ct. 1068 , 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970). That standard is that no person may be convicted except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every element of the offense charged. In examining KRS 514.040(l)(a) to determine every element of the offense, we find that those elements are clearly enunciated as (1) obtaining property of another, (2) by deception, and (3) with intention to deprive him thereof. There is simply no statutory requisite of reliance on the false impression, merely that the perpetrator obtained the property by false impression, with intent to deprive. At that point the offense denounced by the statute is complete, and all requisite elements were proved in the instant case. It is the state of mind of the criminal, not the victim, which the statute denounces.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.