Barber v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Barber v. State

1931 OK CR 397, 2 P.2d 975, 52 Okla. Crim. 62, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 387

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 5, 1931

DocketNo. A-8060.

StatusPublished

This text of 1931 OK CR 397 (Barber 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

Barber v. State, 1931 OK CR 397, 2 P.2d 975, 52 Okla. Crim. 62, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 387 (Okla. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the county court of Jackson county of the crime of selling intoxicating liquors, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $75 and serve a term of 45 days in the county jail, and has appealed.

The petition in error and transcript of the record were filed in this court on January 9, 1931. No further appearance has been made by the plaintiff in error, nor any further extension of time asked in which to file brief in support of the assignments of error.

We have carefully examined the record,- and find the information properly charges -the offense. The defendant was accorded a fair and impartial trial. No' funda *63 mental errors appear in the record sufficient to warrant a reversal.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the county court of Jackson county of the crime of selling intoxicating liquors, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $75 and serve a term of 45 days in the county jail, and has appealed.

The petition in error and transcript of the record were filed in this court on January 9, 1931. No further appearance has been made by the plaintiff in error, nor any further extension of time asked in which to file brief in support of the assignments of error.

We have carefully examined the record,- and find the information properly charges -the offense. The defendant was accorded a fair and impartial trial. No' funda *63 mental errors appear in the record sufficient to warrant a reversal.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1931 OK CR 397, 2 P.2d 975, 52 Okla. Crim. 62, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barber-v-state-oklacrimapp-1931.