1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 32 Wis.2d
  5. 32 Wis.2d 190 (1966)
 

LA VIGNE v. STATE

32 Wis.2d 190 (1966)

LA VIGNE, Plaintiff in error, v. STATE, Defendant in error.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

October 4, 1966.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the plaintiff in error there were briefs and oral argument by Francis J. Demet of Milwaukee.

For the defendant in error the cause was argued by Robert E. Sutton, assistant district attorney of Milwaukee county, with whom on the brief were Bronson C. La Follette, attorney general, and Hugh R. O'Connell, district attorney.

BEILFUSS, J.

The defendant contends that evidence is wholly insufficient to convict her because there is no proof that she either made the checks out or that she uttered them, and there is a fatal variance between the proof and the crime alleged.

Sec. 943.38, Stats., provides as follows:

"Forgery. (1) Whoever with intent to defraud falsely makes or alters a writing or object of any of the following...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases