In order to constitute the crime of obtaining property by false pretenses it is not sufficient to prove the false pretenses and that property was obtained thereby, but it must be proved that the false pretenses were made with intent to cheat and defraud another. Another essential element of the crime is that the money was paid or the property parted with in reliance upon and under the inducement of the false pretenses alleged.
Defendant placed an ad in a newspaper indicating that he was looking for a housekeeper for hotel purposes with possibility of matrimony. Complainant responded and met with defendant. Defendant told complainant that he intended to sell his hotel and was planning to lease another hotel to be occupied by them upon their marriage. He asked complainant if he could borrow money to enable him to lease the hotel. Complainant gave the money to defendant, and she did not see him again until after his arrest. The trial court convicted defendant of grand larceny in the first degree by false pretenses. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction.
Was the evidence sufficient to justify defendant’s conviction for grand larceny in the first degree by false pretenses?
It was proved that defendant made false representations of existing facts to induce his victim to give him money. Also, the State proved a deliberate intention to defraud, the falsity of the pretenses made, and the reliance by the victim thereon.