Boydstun v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Boydstun v. State

1912 OK CR 470, 128 P. 1133, 8 Okla. Crim. 735, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 456

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 14, 1912

DocketNo. A-1513.

StatusPublished

This text of 1912 OK CR 470 (Boydstun 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

Boydstun v. State, 1912 OK CR 470, 128 P. 1133, 8 Okla. Crim. 735, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 456 (Okla. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the county court of Bryan county of the offense of having whisky in his possession with intent of violating the prohibition law. On August 16, 1911, he was sentenced to be imprisoned in the county jail for a period of 100 days and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars. Prom this judgment he appealed by filing in this court December 14, 1911, a petition in error with case-made attached. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the plaintiff in error is a fugitive from justice from the state of Oklahoma and that his present residence is unknown. Which motion is supported by several affidavits. No response has been made to said motion. In the case of Tyler v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 179, 104 Pac. 919, it was held that this court will *736 not consider an appeal unless the plaintiff in error is where he can be made to respond to any judgment or order which' may be rendered in the ease, and where he makes his escape from the custody of the law and is at large, as a fugitive from justice the .court will on motion dismiss the appeal. The motion of the Attorney General is sustained and the appeal is hereby dismissed with direction to the county court to enforce its judgment and sentence therein.

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 Bryan county of the offense of having whisky in his possession with intent of violating the prohibition law. On August 16, 1911, he was sentenced to be imprisoned in the county jail for a period of 100 days and to pay a fine of five hundred dollars. Prom this judgment he appealed by filing in this court December 14, 1911, a petition in error with case-made attached. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the plaintiff in error is a fugitive from justice from the state of Oklahoma and that his present residence is unknown. Which motion is supported by several affidavits. No response has been made to said motion. In the case of Tyler v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 179, 104 Pac. 919, it was held that this court will *736 not consider an appeal unless the plaintiff in error is where he can be made to respond to any judgment or order which' may be rendered in the ease, and where he makes his escape from the custody of the law and is at large, as a fugitive from justice the .court will on motion dismiss the appeal. The motion of the Attorney General is sustained and the appeal is hereby dismissed with direction to the county court to enforce its judgment and sentence therein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1912 OK CR 470, 128 P. 1133, 8 Okla. Crim. 735, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boydstun-v-state-oklacrimapp-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack