People v. Schneider

HOUSER, J.

Under the provisions of section 476a of the Penal Code, defendant was charged with the commission of the criminal offense of “issuing check without sufficient funds”. From a judgment of conviction and from an order by which his motion for a new trial was denied, defendant has appealed to this court.

On the trial of the action defendant admitted the issuance by him of the check in question; also the fact that in the bank on which the check was drawn he had no funds. In substance, his defense consisted in the claim that the check was issued by reason of an excusable mistake on his part; and in that regard the story told by defendant seemed probable, and the corroborating circumstances appeared to lend substantial support thereto. In effect, it was that, although defendant had no banking account with the bank on which the cheek in question was drawn, he did have an account in another bank; and that in issuing the check on which he was prosecuted, the reason why he had used a check on a bank in which he had no funds was that his employment required him to carry blank checks on many different banks for the use and convenience of persons with whom he transacted business, and that on the occasion in question in his haste and confusion, he inadvertently used a check on a bank in which he had no account, instead of a check on the bank in which he had funds deposited sufficient in amount to satisfy and pay the check for the issuance of which he was on trial.

The principal complaint registered by appellant is • that, regarding so-called “similar offenses” said to have been committed by defendant, evidence was erroneously admitted against him. The facts with relation thereto appear to be that approximately sixteen days after the date of the issuance of the check in question, defendant issued two other checks on the bank in which he kept his account; that at the time of such issuance defendant had funds in said bank sufficient to pay each of said checks; but that

[751]

three days after the latter of such checks was issued, the account of defendant in his bank was “closed”; and that thereafter, when the said two checks were presented by the holder thereof to the bank for payment, the bank refused to pay the same.

An examination of the pertinent provisions of section 476a of the Penal Code, for the alleged violation of which defendant was prosecuted, discloses the situation that, in effect, it denounces the utterance of “any check . . . upon any bank . . . for the payment of money, knowing at the time of such . . . uttering . . . that the maker . . . has not sufficient funds in, or credit with said bank . . . for the payment of such check ... in full upon its presentation”.