State v. Hutzel

Citations

• 108 Kan. 456
• 195 P. 887
• 1921 Kan. LEXIS 194

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Criminal Law — Destruction of Deed with Intent to Defraud — Sufficient Information. An information which lacks no material matter of precision and certainty to fully apprise a defendant of the crime charged against him and which is sufficiently clear to cause the court no doubt touching the correct judgment to be pronounced thereon upon a verdict of guilty is sufficient against a motion to quash or a motion in arrest of judgment.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence—Issue Properly for Jury. The evidence examined, and held' that notwithstanding that part of it which tended to exculpate the defendant the issue was properly one for the consideration of the jury.</p> <p>3. Same — Inadequate Instructions to Jury. Where the attorney and confidential adviser of the grantor of a deed receives such deed from his client to be delivered to the grantee after the death of the grantor, and the attorney, during the grantor’s lifetime destroys the deed, the matter of the attorney’s good faith, when he candidly admits that he destroyed it, is of controlling significance when such attorney is prosecuted on a charge of destroying it with intent to defraud the grantee, and the question whether the grantor retained control over the deed during his lifetime and whether he expressly or impliedly authorized the destruction of the deed should also be adequately covered by the court’s instructions to the jury.</p> <p>4. Same — Instructions. The instructions requested were properly refused, but those given were inadequate and prejudicially erroneous.</p>