Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDDIE WILLIAMS, Appellant
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1968-07-17
Citations: 250 Or. 513
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDDIE WILLIAMS, Appellant.
Judges: Before McAllister, Presiding Justice, and O’Connell and Denecke, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 250
Pages: 513–514

Head Matter:
Argued July 11,
affirmed July 17, 1968
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDDIE WILLIAMS, Appellant.
443 P. 2d 612
Oscar D. Howlett, Portland, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.
Jacob B. Tanser, Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George Van Hoomissen, District Attorney, Portland.
Before McAllister, Presiding Justice, and O’Connell and Denecke, Justices.

Opinion:
McAllister, j.
Defendant was convicted of knowingly uttering and publishing a forged bank check, and appeals. The check was one of many payroll checks stolen in Portland, on October 10, 1966, from Modern Heating Service, and the name and address of the firm was printed on the check. The check bore No. 4641, was dated October 10, 1966, was in the amount of $67.40, was. payable to Howard Williams, and ivas signed "L. C. Campbell." ' The amount had been written with the check protector of Modern Heating Service. Defendant attempted to cash the check at a Tradewell Store in Portland, on October 11, 1966.
Defendant complains only because evidence was received that earlier on the same day he cashed at another store another check identical in all particulars except that it bore No. 4642. There is no merit in defendant's contention. The evidence objected to was admissible to prove criminal intent. State v. Holbert, 242 Or 228, 408 P2d 941 (1965); State v. Cruse, 231 Or 326, 333, 372 P2d 974 (1962), and earlier cases therein cited.
The judgment is affirmed.