AG19880321 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In upholding a conviction under the false pretenses statute, the North Carolina Supreme Court noted that "[one] may obtain money or property iai by falsely representing his own identity . . . or he may so do [bi by creating the identity of a ~business' calculated to engender confidence in the inherent worth of the check." State v. Freeman, 308 N.C. at , 302 S.E.2d at 785. such a holding rests on the fact that "behind the mere writing of a worthless check lies a cleverly devised plan to deceive." Id. Hence, a defendant charged under G.S. 14-100 may be convicted based npon evidence showing "the pretense that [the maker of the check] was a legitimate business." State v. Freeman, 79 ~.C.App. 177, __, 339 S.E.2d 56, 61, cert. denied, 317 N.C. J38, 346 S.E.2d 144 (1986). Accordingly, the Court finds that probable cause existed in this'case (1) that Scorpio Enterprises was not a legitimate business and (2) that plaintiff falsely represented the opposite. Hence, no constitutlonal violation occurred in that the arrest warrant was supported by probable cause that plaintiff di_~d in fact commit an offense under G.S. 14-100. The fact that the magistrate stated the basis of the felony charge as passing a worthless check does not invalidate the entire process. To maintain an action under section 1983, a litigant must plead and prove the following three essential elementes: (1) that be has been deprived of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States; (2) that the defendants subjected plaintiff to this deprivation, or caused him to be so subjected; and (3) tha. t th~ defendants acted under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, or usage of any State. 1 C.Antieau, Federal civil Rights Acts § 230, at 385 (2d ed. 1981). In this case, plaintiff bas failed to establish the first element. Defendant Armstrong was sot required to conclude beyond all doubt that plaintiff was involved directly in a widespread scheme of fraud. It is sufficient that he'had probable cause to 3