Skip to main content

State v. Chance

Citations

  • 82 Kan. 388
  • 108 P. 789
  • 1910 Kan. LEXIS 263

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Forgery — Signing a Different Name than that Intended. Where one affixes to a note a signature which he intends shall be regarded as that of another person the act is not prevented from, being forgery by the circumstance that the name is not correctly written.</p> <p>2. - Rule Applied to “Heinis” and “Hein.” Where the name Henry “Heinis” is signed to a note with the intention that it shall be supposed to be the signature of Henry “Hein,” it can not be said as a matter of law that the difference is so great as to prevent the deception of any person of ordinary prudence.</p> <p>3. Criminal Law — Evidence of Another Offense than the One Charged. Upon the trial of an employee on the charge of uttering a note payable to his employer, which he had forged for the purpose of covering up a shortage, evidence that he had forged other notes for the same purpose is competent.</p> <p>4. Information — Amendment after Plea of Not Guilty. By leave of court an information may be amended in matter of substance as well as of form after a plea of not guilty has been entered and before the trial is begun.</p>

Judges: Mason

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.