People v. Meldrum
Before: Waste
WASTE, C. J. In an information filed by the district In attorney of Los Angeles County the appellant was charged [53]with the crime of forgery. He was tried and convicted, and appeals from the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The record discloses that appellant and one Frances M. Boon promoted a corporation known as the Hollywood Vogue, Inc. They, with three employees who apparently had no financial interest in the company, were named as directors in the articles of incorporation. There was an agreement between appellant and Mrs. Boon to the effect that neither should draw a fixed salary, but that each from time to time as business permitted should draw an equal amount. A bank account was opened with the Bank of America in the name of Hollywood Vogue, Inc. On the signature card filed with the bank is printed a copy of what purports to be a resolution adopted by the board of directors authorizing the establishment of the account and further authorizing the appellant as president and Mrs. Boon as vice-president or B. S. Duper as secretary, to withdraw corporate funds from the account. On the reverse side of the card appear the signatures of these corporate officers. During the course of the trial a bank employee testified that two of the above signatures were required on all checks. However, this same witness identified other checks, introduced in evidence by the appellant, that had been recognized and cashed by the bank though signed by the appellant alone.
On August 23, 1933, Mrs. Boon requested appellant to sign with her a check for ten dollars for her personal account. He agreed to this, provided she would in turn sign a cheek for a like amount payable to him. Two checks were thereupon drawn, each for ten dollars, one payable to appellant and the other to Frances M. Boon. Before pre-' senting his check for payment appellant admittedly altered it so as to call for the payment of fifty dollars and thereafter cashed it. This admitted act of altering and cashing the cheek as altered led to the charge of forgery of" which appellant now stands convicted.
Section 470 of the Penal Code provides, in part, that “every person who, with intent to defraud, . . . alters . . . any . . . check . . . or . . . passes ... as true and genuine any of the above named . . . altered . . . matters as above specified and described, knowing the same to be . . . altered . . . with intent to defraud any person ... is guilty of for[54]
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)