#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. KENNETH JORDAN

No. 7110SC740

(Filed 15 December 1971)

Forgery § 1 — possession of forged instrument — presumptions

A person who is found in the possession of a forged instrument and who is endeavoring to obtain money upon it is presumed to have forged the instrument or to have consented to its forgery.

Appeal by defendant from Hobgood, Judge, 12 July 1971 Session of Superior Court held in Wake County.

Defendant was convicted of forgery and of uttering a forged check. A discussion of the facts is not necessary to dispose of the appeal by the defendant.

Attorney General Robert Morgan by Associate Attorney Henry E. Poole for the State.

Robert P. Gruber for defendant appellant.

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s court-appointed counsel brings forward only one assignment of error. Counsel tacitly concedes that to sustain his assignment of error this Court would have to overrule the long-standing doctrine set forth in State v. Welch, 266 N.C. 291, 145 S.E. 2d 902, as follows:

> “ . . . ‘[W]hen one is found in the possession of a forged instrument and is endeavoring to obtain money or advances upon it, this raises a presumption that defendant either forged or consented to the forging such instrument, and nothing else appearing the person would be presumed to be guilty.’ ”

*255For the reasons stated by Chief Justice Ruffin in State v. Morgan, 19 N.C. 348, the presumption is sound. The record in this case reveals no prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Brock and Britt concur.