Barefield v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Barefield v. State

1924 OK CR 69, 223 P. 408, 26 Okla. Crim. 274, 1924 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 56

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided March 6, 1924·No. No. A-4454.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Walter Barefield was on February 22, 1922, by information filed in the county court of Stephens county, charged with having sold intoxicating liquor contrary to law. At the trial, June 3, 1922, by verdict of a jury he was found guilty as charged, assessing his punishment at confinement in the county jail for a period of 30 days and a fine of $50. From the judgment on the verdict he appeals.

The time for filing a brief supporting the appeal has passed, and, no brief having been filed, it may be assumed that the appeal has been abandoned. The cause has been regularly submitted on the record, which has been examined, disclosing no errors.

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.

Walter Barefield was on February 22, 1922, by information filed in the county court of Stephens county, charged with having sold intoxicating liquor contrary to law. At the trial, June 3, 1922, by verdict of a jury he was found guilty as charged, assessing his punishment at confinement in the county jail for a period of 30 days and a fine of $50. From the judgment on the verdict he appeals.

The time for filing a brief supporting the appeal has passed, and, no brief having been filed, it may be assumed that the appeal has been abandoned. The cause has been regularly submitted on the record, which has been examined, disclosing no errors.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Barefield v. State, 1924 OK CR 69, 223 P. 408, 26 Okla. Crim. 274, 1924 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 56 (Okla. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

1924 OK CR 69 (Barefield v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related