Adams v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Adams v. State

1909 OK CR 149, 105 P. 1118, 3 Okla. Crim. 207, 1909 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 22, 1909

DocketNo. 278.

StatusPublished

This text of 1909 OK CR 149 (Adams v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. State, 1909 OK CR 149, 105 P. 1118, 3 Okla. Crim. 207, 1909 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253 (Okla. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CTJEIAM.

Motion having been filed in the above-entitled cause to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that notices to the county attorney of said county and the clerk of the district court that the defendant appeals from the judgment rendered, have never been ¿sferved as required by section 5610, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. St. 1903, and notice of said motion to dismiss having been served as required by rule 6 of the rules of this court (1 Okla. Cr. xi, 101 Pac. viii), and no appearance having been made to resist said motion, the court, finds there is nothing in the record showing proof of service of notices that appellant appeals from the judgment as required by law. Upon the record before us, there is nothing which confers jurisdiction upon this court to review the errors set forth in the petition in error. There is no case in this court. For the reason stated, the purported appeal is dismissed, at the cost of plaintiff in error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PEE CTJEIAM.

Motion having been filed in the above-entitled cause to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that notices to the county attorney of said county and the clerk of the district court that the defendant appeals from the judgment rendered, have never been ¿sferved as required by section 5610, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. St. 1903, and notice of said motion to dismiss having been served as required by rule 6 of the rules of this court (1 Okla. Cr. xi, 101 Pac. viii), and no appearance having been made to resist said motion, the court, finds there is nothing in the record showing proof of service of notices that appellant appeals from the judgment as required by law. Upon the record before us, there is nothing which confers jurisdiction upon this court to review the errors set forth in the petition in error. There is no case in this court. For the reason stated, the purported appeal is dismissed, at the cost of plaintiff in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1909 OK CR 149, 105 P. 1118, 3 Okla. Crim. 207, 1909 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-state-oklacrimapp-1909.