Search results
Aug 2, 2023 · In this article, we will explore when breach of trust charges are invalid, and what the state must establish to secure a conviction. Unveiling Breach of Trust in SC. To successfully convict an individual of breach of trust, the state must establish the following elements: Existence of a fiduciary or trust relationship with the alleged victim.
In South Carolina, Breach of Trust with Fraudulent Intent —also just called Breach of Trust— is a form of property theft involving trust. Breach of Trust is nearly identical to larceny. The defining characteristic between larceny and Breach of Trust is the element of lawful acquisition by the person charged with Breach of Trust.
Jun 15, 2020 · Breach of trust with fraudulent intent occurs when one person is entrusted with another person’s money or property, but intentionally converts those assets to their own personal use or benefit. The act is commonly known as embezzlement in other states and is considered criminal offense in South Carolina.
Apr 2, 2022 · Breach of trust with fraudulent intent is defined in South Carolina Code § 16-13-230 and South Carolina appellate opinions. To get a conviction for breach of trust, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt:
Feb 19, 2021 · You had fraudulent intent when you took the property. You could also be charged and convicted of breach of trust if you “hire or counsel” another person to commit a breach of trust. If there is no probable cause for each of these elements, law enforcement should not have charged you.
Breach of trust with fraudulent intent Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates | Other versions (A) A person committing a breach of trust with a fraudulent intention or a person who hires or counsels another person to commit a breach of trust with a fraudulent intention is guilty of larceny.
Nov 2, 1999 · Kurtis Jackson was convicted of breach of trust with fraudulent intent. The trial court sentenced him to five years imprisonment, suspended on service of five years probation and payment of restitution and a fine. Jackson appeals, arguing the court erred in denying his motions for directed verdict, or alternatively, mistrial. We reverse.
