State v. Manion
Annotate this CaseAfter a bench trial, Defendant was convicted of five counts of theft by deception and two counts of conspiracy to commit theft by deception. The convictions arose from various construction and remodeling contracts Defendant entered into in a two-year period with several homeowners. The Court of Special Appeals reversed, concluding that the evidence concerning Defendant’s intent to deprive the homeowners of their property was insufficient to sustain a conviction for theft by deception. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support a reasonable inference that Defendant had the specific intent to deprive each homeowner of their property by deception.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.