Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

Commonwealth v. Mutnik, Appellant.

OPINION PER CURIAM:

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

HOFFMAN, J., dissents and would hold that no crime was committed without an intent to defraud in the instant case. Section 4105 of the Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, P.L. 1482, No. 334, § 1; 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4105, provides only that an actor pass a check and that he knows that the check will not be honored. The section does not explicitly require that anything of value pass or that the victim be injured or harmed in any way. Cf., Commonwealth v. Conti, 236 Pa. Super. 488, 345 A.2d 238 (1975); Commonwealth v. Ulsh, 68 Pa. D. C.2d 124 (1974). As such, § 4105 invites litigants to use the already overtaxed criminal justice system to resolve what are essentially contract disputes. See Commonwealth v. Gallo, 473 Pa. 186, 373 A.2d 1109 (1977).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

COMMONWEALTH v. MUTNIK
(Aug 24, 1977)