From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Bethune

Supreme Court of South Carolina
May 13, 1913
94 S.C. 443 (S.C. 1913)

Summary

In Bowyer v. Continental Casualty Co., 72 W. Va. 333, 338, 78 S.E. 1000, it is stated that, "It requires more than a false statement to prove fraud. It must have been made with intent to mislead and deceive and the injured party must have relied upon it".

Summary of this case from Workman v. Lewis

Opinion

8544

May 13, 1913.

Before ERNEST GARY, J., Clarendon, January, 1912. Affirmed.

Indictment against Willie Bethune. Defendant appeals.

Mr. John H. Clifton, for appellant.

Solicitor Philip H. Stohl, contra.


May 13, 1913. The opinion of the Court was delivered by


The defendant, Willie Bethune, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by electrocution. He appeals on the ground that at the time of the commission of the crime and at the time of his trial, the penalty for murder was death by hanging, and that the statute providing for the infliction of the death penalty by electrocution is ex post facto and unconstitutional as to him. The question was decided against the contention of appellant by the opinion and judgment of the Court in the State v. Joe Malloy, 95 S.C.

It is, therefore, the judgment of the Court that the judgment of the Court of General Sessions be affirmed, and the cause remanded to that Court so that a new day may be set for the execution of the sentence.

Affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE FRASER disqualified. Writ of error to Supreme Court of the United States has been issued in this case. R.


Summaries of

State v. Bethune

Supreme Court of South Carolina
May 13, 1913
94 S.C. 443 (S.C. 1913)

In Bowyer v. Continental Casualty Co., 72 W. Va. 333, 338, 78 S.E. 1000, it is stated that, "It requires more than a false statement to prove fraud. It must have been made with intent to mislead and deceive and the injured party must have relied upon it".

Summary of this case from Workman v. Lewis
Case details for

State v. Bethune

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. BETHUNE

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: May 13, 1913

Citations

94 S.C. 443 (S.C. 1913)
78 S.E. 1000

Citing Cases

Workman v. Casualty Co.

By section 62, chapter 34, Code 1923, the contract of insurance is limited to the face of the policy. In…

Workman v. Lewis

Our present inquiry, therefore, is to evaluate the transaction which the trial court has labelled as…