FALSE PRETENSES
False representations of material past or present
facts, known by the wrongdoer to be false, and
made with the intent to defraud a victim into
passing title in property to the wrongdoer.
Suppose Reba tells Alberto that a synthetic
gemstone is a valuable diamond that she will
give to Alberto in exchange for Alberto’s truck.
Alberto thinks this sounds like a good deal and
transfers title of his truck to Reba. If Reba knows
that the stone is a synthetic gemstone, she is
guilty of false pretenses.
A truthful statement that causes someone to
give up rights in property does not constitute
criminal false pretenses; a representation must be
false at the time the potential victim is about to
pass title. If the representation was false when
made, but changing circumstances made it true
by the time the victim passed title, false pretenses
did not arise. Also, if the alleged wrongdoer
thought his or her statement was a lie, but the
statement was in fact true, the crime of false pre-
tenses was not committed. For example, if Reba
thinks the stone is synthetic, but it actually is a
diamond, her statement to Alberto claiming that
it is a diamond is true (even if she doesn’t know
it). Therefore, Reba is not guilty of false pretenses.
A false representation can be a verbal, writ-
ten, or implied statement. For example, if a
statement suggests that the wrongdoer has the
authority, power, or ability to perform what is
represented, but the wrongdoer does not have
that authority, power, or ability, the implication
is a false representation.
A false representation can also occur when
the wrongdoer says or does nothing. This is the
case when someone knowingly conceals infor-
mation that the victim should be made aware of.
For example, if Reba tells Alberto that she will
trade her valuable sports car for Alberto’s truck,
knowing that the sports car does not have a
motor, she must tell Alberto about the missing
motor or her nondisclosure will be a false repre-
sentation.
The false representation supporting false
pretenses must be about a material fact. A mate-
rial fact is one that would be important to the
victim in his or her decision-making process.
For example, it is important for Alberto to know
that Reba’s sports car does not have a motor,
because without a motor, the car is less valuable
and cannot be driven. It is less important for
him to know that the tire pressure is low,
because that fact does not affect the value of the
car, and thus Reba would not be guilty of false
pretenses for failing to mention that the tires
need air.
The representation must concern a past or
present fact; a false representation of a future
fact does not constitute criminal false pretenses.
A car salesperson who claims that a car will run
great in ten years is representing a future fact.An
exaggerated expression of opinion, like a sales
pitch,may not be entirely true but is not a crim-
inal false representation. However, a promise
about the future that, at the time it is made, the
promisor does not intend to keep, is a criminal
false representation of a material fact. If the
salesperson promises to buy the car back if it is
not running great in ten years, but he does not
intend to satisfy the promise, the false promise is
a false representation.
When a representation is in fact false, the
wrongdoer must know it is false. If an alleged
wrongdoer believed the statement was true—
whether that belief was reasonable or unreason-
able—he or she did not commit false pretenses
because they did not knowingly make a false
representation. If Reba believes that the syn-
thetic stone is in fact a diamond, then she does
not commit false pretenses when she tells
Alberto it is a diamond. However, if the wrong-
doer is not sure or does not care if a statement is
false, and makes the statement with reckless
indifference for truthfulness, the statement is a
false representation.
It is important to determine why the wrong-
doer told the lie. The wrongdoer must intend
the false representation to defraud the victim.
Intention to defraud the victim exists where the
wrongdoer planned to unjustly acquire title to
the victim’s property by means of the untruth.
That is, the wrongdoer will have planned the
false representation in advance and will have cal-
culated to deceive the victim into transferring
title by way of the false statement. Telling an
untruth, in and of itself, will not subject the liar
to prosecution for false pretenses.
The victim of false pretenses must have
relied on the false representation. The false rep-
resentation must be the reason, or one of the
reasons, that the victim passed title to the
wrongdoer. It does not matter how gullible or
naive the victim would seem for believing the
representation; the wrongdoer is still guilty. On
the other hand, to rely on a false statement, the
potential victim must believe it to be true. An
individual who does not believe a false represen-
tation but passes title to the statement maker
anyway does not rely on the representation, and
the statement maker will not be guilty.
Conviction of false pretenses requires the
wrongdoer to obtain more than possession of the
property; the wrongdoer must also obtain title to
the property. A wrongdoer who gains possession
of property but not title to the property is guilty
of a different crime often referred to as LARCENY.
For example, a wrongdoer who breaks a truck’s
window and hot-wires the truck acquires only
possession of the truck and is guilty of larceny.
Other laws may require the delivery of the
possession of property in order to complete a
transfer of title. In such cases, the wrongdoer
may have to obtain title as well as possession of
the property to be guilty of false pretenses.
Imagine that the laws of the state where Alberto
and Reba live require a party to take possession
in order to obtain a valid transfer of title.
Alberto signs the paper title over to Reba, but
before Reba drives the truck away, Alberto fig-
ures out the scam, and Reba runs off. No trans-
fer of title has occurred, because the state’s laws
require possession in addition to paper title, and
Reba is not guilty of false pretenses.
Title does not have to pass directly to the
wrongdoer. A wrongdoer can cause a victim to
