State v. Hardy
1979 La. LEXIS 7110, 376 So. 2d 131 (1979)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Louisiana law, the crime of theft (R.S. 14:67) encompasses obtaining money or property by means of fraudulent representations, including misrepresentations concerning future facts or services, provided there is an intent to permanently deprive the victim and no intent to fulfill the promise.
Facts:
- The defendant was a former investigator for the Baton Rouge City Prosecutor.
- The defendant was charged in separate indictments with three violations of felony theft.
- The state alleged that the defendant committed theft by making fraudulent representations to various persons that "he would take care of DWI tickets."
- The defendant allegedly obtained money from these individuals by means of these fraudulent promises.
Procedural Posture:
- The defendant was charged in separate indictments with three violations of felony theft (R.S. 14:67).
- In response to bills of particulars from the defendant, the state alleged the defendant committed theft by fraudulent representations that he would 'take care of DWI tickets.'
- The defendant filed motions to quash the indictments, arguing that, as modified by the answers to the bills of particulars, they failed to charge the crime of felony theft.
- The trial judge granted the defendant's motions to quash the indictments.
- The Supreme Court of Louisiana granted writs to review the trial court's decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does obtaining money by fraudulently promising a future service, specifically to "take care of DWI tickets," constitute felony theft under R.S. 14:67, even if the alleged fraudulent promise relates to an act that could also be a separate criminal offense?
Opinions:
Majority - Dixon, Justice
Yes, obtaining money by fraudulently promising a future service, such as "taking care of DWI tickets," constitutes felony theft under R.S. 14:67, especially when there is an implicit allegation that the defendant had no intent to carry out the promises. The court reasoned that R.S. 14:67 broadly defines theft, combining traditional offenses like larceny, embezzlement, and obtaining by false pretenses, to cover any misappropriation or taking of value by fraudulent conduct, practices, or representations, with an intent to permanently deprive. Unlike common law false pretenses, R.S. 14:67 includes misrepresentations as to future facts, as established in cases like State v. Dabbs and State v. Williams. The allegations that the defendant took money by fraudulently representing he would 'take care of tickets' fall squarely within the statute's provisions. The court further clarified that the defendant was charged with obtaining money through fraudulent representations, implying a lack of intent to fulfill the promises, rather than merely accepting money for corrupt influencing. Whether the state can prove this intent is a matter for trial, not for dismissing the indictment.
Analysis:
This case significantly broadens the application of Louisiana's theft statute (R.S. 14:67), clarifying its departure from common law false pretenses by explicitly including fraudulent misrepresentations of future actions. It underscores the statute's intent to consolidate various forms of fraudulent property deprivation into a single offense. The ruling ensures that individuals cannot evade theft charges simply because their fraudulent promise might also relate to another potential crime, provided the intent to permanently deprive through fraud is present. This decision reinforces the principle that the core inquiry in theft by fraudulent representation is the defendant's intent at the time the representation was made and the property was obtained.
