Carlisle v. State

Decided December 15, 1884

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1884-12-15

<p>1. Offer to refund. — Under an indictment for obtaining money under false pretenses (Code, § 4370), evidence of the fact that the defendant offered, two or three weeks after the money was obtained, to refund it with interest, is not relevant or competent evidence for the defense.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1884-12-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2004 · most notably People v. Murray (1891), 16 Ala. App. 635 - Mitchell v. State (1918)

1 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

STONE, C. J.

¶1The defendant was tried and convicted for obtaining money under false pretenses. He offered testimony tending the show, that, two or three weeks after the money was obtained, he offered to repay it, with some interest. This testimony was ruled out, and he excepted.

¶2The testimony could not tend to disprove anything alleged against the defendant, nor was it part of the res gestee, so as to shed light on the intent with which he uttered the pretense, alleged to be false and fraudulent. There is no error in the record.

¶3Affirmed.