Allen v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Allen v. State

1923 OK CR 183, 216 P. 1117, 24 Okla. Crim. 106, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 281

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 7, 1923

DocketNo. A-4078.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 183 (Allen 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

Allen v. State, 1923 OK CR 183, 216 P. 1117, 24 Okla. Crim. 106, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 281 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, William Otto Allen, was convicted in the district court of Alfalfa county of the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon and punishment fixed at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a period of two years. Judgment was rendered on the 16th day of March, 1921, and the appeal lodged in this court on the 14th day of September, 1921. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time same was submitted. Rule 9 of this court (12 *107 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) provides: “Whenno counsel appears and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.” After an examination of the pleadings, the instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence, the court finds that no prejudicial error occurred sufficient to authorize a reversal of this judgment, and the same is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, William Otto Allen, was convicted in the district court of Alfalfa county of the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon and punishment fixed at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a period of two years. Judgment was rendered on the 16th day of March, 1921, and the appeal lodged in this court on the 14th day of September, 1921. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time same was submitted. Rule 9 of this court (12 *107 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) provides: “Whenno counsel appears and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.” After an examination of the pleadings, the instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence, the court finds that no prejudicial error occurred sufficient to authorize a reversal of this judgment, and the same is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 183, 216 P. 1117, 24 Okla. Crim. 106, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.