Opinion

Semler v. State

  • 17 Ohio C.C. Dec. 581
Court
Ohio Circuit Courts
Filed
Apr 15, 1905
Status
Published
Author
Winch
On the bench
Henry, Marvin, Winch
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

WINCH, J.,

dissenting.

. I dissent in this case for the reason that J believe that the pretense really made by the accused when he said he had arranged for the drafts was a matter to be determined by the jury from the circumstances connected with the uttering of the words, the conduct of the accused, his past relations with the bank, and all the pertinent facts of the ease. The jury having found that he in fact meant he had money on deposit at Sharon it would seem that it is not for us to say that he might have meant something else.

It is to-be regretted that the prosecutor, having asked a competent witness the meaning among bankers of the words “arranged for” when used as in this case, subsequently withdrew the question and it remained unanswered. Had this question been answered there would have been no trouble or uncertainty in arriving at a conclusion one way or the other in this case*

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.