State v. Thorp
State v. Thorp
Opinion of the Court
In tbe district court for Cuming county defendant was accused of violating the pure food law by overreading a test of cream purchased by him from William Pfleuger. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the information and dismissed the prosecution. For the purpose of settling the law, an exception to the ruling on the demurrer is presented here under section 515 of the criminal code.
That part of the pure food law which defendant is accused of violating makes it unlawful for any person to “overread or underread, or in any other manner make, announce or record any false or untrue test of either butter or cream.” Comp. St. 1911, ch. 33, sec. 20. The charge is that John F. Thorp in Cuming county, November 26, 1912, “did then and there wilfully and unlawfully over-read a certain test of cream, and did then and there wilfully and unlawfully make and announce a false and untrue test of cream, he the said John F. Thorp being then and there engaged in the business of testing and purchasing cream for commercial purposes, and having then and there purchased the said cream for commercial purposes from one William Pfleuger.” The information was attacked by demurrer (1) “because the facts stated therein do not constitute an offense punishable by the laws of this state; (2) because the iutent is not alleged, proof of such intent being necessary to make out the offense charged; (3) because there is no allegation of any intent to defraud any one in the doing of the acts complained of.”
Counsel appointed by the trial court to present the reasons for the sustaining of the demurrer argues that the statute can only be sustained by construing it to mean that an intent to defraud the seller by an underreading and that an intent to defraud the purchaser by an over-reading are essential elements of the offense. It is further insisted that the result of overreading the test was to pay too much for the cream, and that defendant did not cheat or intend to defraud any one. The legislature, however, did not use language making intent an ingredient of
Exception sustained.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- State of Nebraska v. John F. Thorp
- Status
- Published