Armstrong v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Armstrong v. State

1912 OK CR 321, 123 P. 1135, 7 Okla. Crim. 727, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 170

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 9, 1912

DocketNo. A-1400.

StatusPublished

This text of 1912 OK CR 321 (Armstrong 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

Armstrong v. State, 1912 OK CR 321, 123 P. 1135, 7 Okla. Crim. 727, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 170 (Okla. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, L. Armstrong, was convieted in the county court of Tulsa county on an information which charged the unlawful sale of whisky, and sentenced to serve a term of six months in the county jail and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars, and in the default of the payment of the same to be further confined until such fine is satisfied as by law provided. No brief had been filed, and no appearance made on behalf of the defendant when the case was called for final submission on the regular assignment for this term. Por this reason the Attorney General has moved to dismiss the appeal or affirm. The motion to affirm is sustained. The judgment of the county court of Tulsa county is therefore affirmed and the ease remanded forthwith with direction to enforce its judgment therein.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, L. Armstrong, was convieted in the county court of Tulsa county on an information which charged the unlawful sale of whisky, and sentenced to serve a term of six months in the county jail and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars, and in the default of the payment of the same to be further confined until such fine is satisfied as by law provided. No brief had been filed, and no appearance made on behalf of the defendant when the case was called for final submission on the regular assignment for this term. Por this reason the Attorney General has moved to dismiss the appeal or affirm. The motion to affirm is sustained. The judgment of the county court of Tulsa county is therefore affirmed and the ease remanded forthwith with direction to enforce its judgment therein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1912 OK CR 321, 123 P. 1135, 7 Okla. Crim. 727, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-state-oklacrimapp-1912.