Anderson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Anderson v. State

1913 OK CR 345, 135 P. 1192, 10 Okla. Crim. 648, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 321

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 30, 1913

DocketNo. A-1913.

StatusPublished

This text of 1913 OK CR 345 (Anderson 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

Anderson v. State, 1913 OK CR 345, 135 P. 1192, 10 Okla. Crim. 648, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 321 (Okla. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE OURIAM.

Andy Anderson and Bed Bryson were convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Jefferson county on an information purporting to charge them with conducting a roulette game. The Attorney General has filed a confession of error on the ground that information does not charge an offense under the law. This court has repeatedly passed on the form of information relied upon in this case. The demurrer filed by counsel for plaintiffs in error here, defendants in the lower court, should have been sustained and the county attorney directed to file a proper information. The confession of error is sustained and the judgment reversed, with directions to the trial court to sustain the demurrer and cause the county attorney to file a proper information and try this case according to law. There is no justification for a trial court ignoring the settled rules of law and thus burdening the taxpayers of his county with the costs of an unnecessary appeal to this court.

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

PEE OURIAM.

Andy Anderson and Bed Bryson were convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Jefferson county on an information purporting to charge them with conducting a roulette game. The Attorney General has filed a confession of error on the ground that information does not charge an offense under the law. This court has repeatedly passed on the form of information relied upon in this case. The demurrer filed by counsel for plaintiffs in error here, defendants in the lower court, should have been sustained and the county attorney directed to file a proper information. The confession of error is sustained and the judgment reversed, with directions to the trial court to sustain the demurrer and cause the county attorney to file a proper information and try this case according to law. There is no justification for a trial court ignoring the settled rules of law and thus burdening the taxpayers of his county with the costs of an unnecessary appeal to this court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1913 OK CR 345, 135 P. 1192, 10 Okla. Crim. 648, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-state-oklacrimapp-1913.