State v. Hooker

Citations

• 99 Wash. 661
• 170 P. 374
• 1918 Wash. LEXIS 709

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Appeal—Record—Statement oe Pacts. An affidavit in support of an objection that sufficient time had not been allowed accused to prepare his defense cannot be considered on appeal when not brought up by statement of facts or bill of exceptions.</p> <p>Same—Trial—Continuance. A continuance in a criminal case in order to prepare for trial is properly denied, where an amended information merely changed the name of the person defrauded and the accused failed to show that a different defense could have been presented if the trial had been delayed.</p> <p>Witnesses — Impeaching — Reputation. After impeaching wit’nesses have testified that they know the reputation of the other witness for truth and veracity in the community in which he lives, and that it is bad, they may testify whether from their knowledge of that reputation they would believe him on oath.</p> <p>' Same — Impeaching — Competency. The competency of an impeaching witness who testified as to the reputation of the other witness for truth and veracity in the vicinity in which he resides and does business, is not affected by the fact that he never heard such reputation discussed in the building in which the other witness did business.</p> <p>Same. Lack of knowledge of an impeaching witness shown upon cross-examination, goes to the credibility and not to the competency of the witness.</p> <p>, False Pretenses—Evidence—Sufficiency. A conviction of obtaining money by false pretenses is sustained by evidence that accused induced a credulous woman to make a loan to a third person by falsely representing that he was wealthy and on the security of ten • acres represented to be of the value of $1,000, when accused knew it was practically valueless; and it is immaterial that the money was turned over to the third party or that other independent' charges of fraud were not proven.</p>