Appeal from the Orders of the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal, of Luzerne County Dated May 15, 1975, Filed at Nos. 2464 and 2465 of 1974 on May 15, 1975. No. 1567 October Term, 1975.
Patrick E. Dougherty, Wilkes-Barre, for appellant.
Patrick J. Toole, Jr., Dist. Atty., Wilkes-Barre, for appellee.
Watkins, President Judge, and Jacobs, Hoffman, Cercone, Price, Van der Voort, and Spaeth, JJ. Price, J., concurs in the result.
[ 242 Pa. Super. Page 485]
On February 19, 1975, appellant was convicted on two indictments, each charging him with issuing or passing a bad check in violation of the Act of Dec. 6, 1972, P.L. 1482, No. 334, § 1, 18 C.P.S.A. § 4105. On May 15, motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were denied. On June 12, appellant was sentenced to pay costs, to make restitution to the payees of the checks, and to serve two years probation. On appeal, appellant contends that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain his convictions in that the Commonwealth did not prove that he knew that the checks would be dishonored, i. e., that he possessed the requisite intent.
[ 242 Pa. Super. Page 486]
(a) Offense defined. -- A person commits an offense if he issues or passes a check or similar sight order for the payment of money, knowing that it will not be honored by the drawee.
(b) Presumption. -- For the purposes of this section as well as in any prosecution for theft committed by means of a bad check, an issuer is presumed to know that the check or order (other than a post-dated check or order) would not be paid, if:
(1) the issuer had no account with the drawee at the time the check or order was issued; or
(2) payment was refused by the drawee for lack of funds, upon presentation within 30 days after issue, and the issuer failed to make good within ten days after receiving notice of that refusal.
In determining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction under this section, we must regard it in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, giving the Commonwealth the benefit of all reasonable inferences arising from it. Commonwealth v. Conti, 236 Pa. Super. 488, 345 A.2d 238 (1975). Applying this standard, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the ...