$ATPT Wayne Mower (the one behind stealing the shell) has been known for fraud
STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Wayne A. MOWER, Defendant and Appellee.
No. 20040491-CA.
Decided: October 14, 2005
Before Judges BILLINGS, BENCH, and THORNE.Mark L. Shurtleff, Attorney General, and Kris C. Leonard, Assistant Attorney General, Salt Lake City, for Appellant. John T. Caine, Richards Caine & Allen, Ogden, for Appellee.
OPINION
¶?1 The State appeals from the trial court's order granting defendant Wayne A. Mower's motion to dismiss the charge of issuing a bad check, a third degree felony, in violation of Utah Code section 76-6-505(2). See Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-505(2) (2003). We reverse.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
¶?2 Mower operates a small business providing individuals with short-term loans. Generally, borrowers secure these loans with the title to their vehicle, which Mower presumably retains until the loan is paid off.
¶?3 On June 12, 2002, Mower agreed to loan Nick Kirkman $4900, to be secured by Kirkman's vehicle title. Kirkman did not have the title with him, but promised to deliver it to Mower by the end of the day. Mower issued Kirkman a check for $4900 (the loan check). He did not, however, fund the corresponding account with sufficient funds to clear the check pending Kirkman's provision of the vehicle title.
¶?4 Kirkman never returned with the title. Instead, he deposited the loan check into his account at Weber State Credit Union (the credit union) and proceeded to write checks against the deposit until the entire sum was depleted. The credit union covered Kirkman's checks without verifying that Mower had sufficient funds to cover the loan check and presented the loan check to Mower's bank, which refused to pay the check based on insufficient funds. Thereafter, the credit union sent Mower a demand letter by certified mail. Mower accepted the demand letter but failed to make good on the check.
¶?5 The credit union filed a compliant against Mower, and the State charged Mower with one count of issuing a bad check. Mower made a motion to dismiss the charge, arguing that he did not issue the loan check for the purpose of obtaining money, property, or any other thing of value as required by the statute. See Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-505(2). The trial court agreed and dismissed the charge, concluding that Kirkman defrauded Mower and that Mower did not obtain or intend to obtain anything of value under State v. Green, 672 P.2d 400 (Utah 1983). The State appeals.
AI
