It shall be sufficient in any indictment where it shall be necessary to allege an intent to defraud, to allege that the party accused did the act with intent to defraud without alleging an intent to defraud any particular person or body corporate, and on the trial of any such indictment, it shall not be necessary to prove an intent to defraud any particular person, but it shall be sufficient to prove that the party accused did the act charged with intent to defraud.

Source:G.S.1873, c. 58, § 417, p. 818; R.S.1913, § 9055; C.S.1922, § 10079; C.S.1929, § 29-1506; R.S.1943, § 29-1506.

Annotations

In prosecution for uttering forged check, it was not necessary to allege intent to defraud any particular person. Benedict v. State, 166 Neb. 295, 89 N.W.2d 82 (1958).

Omission from information of name of party defrauded does not render information insufficient. Bullington v. State, 123 Neb. 432, 243 N.W. 273 (1932).

On indictment for forgery, it is sufficient to allege intent to defraud without specifying any particular person. Davis v. State, 58 Neb. 465, 78 N.W. 930 (1899).

Information is sufficient if it charges intent to defraud in general terms. Morearty v. State, 46 Neb. 652, 65 N.W. 784 (1896).