Briggs v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Briggs v. State

140 P. 1032, 10 Okla. Crim. 688, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 116

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 18, 1914

DocketNo. A-1991.

StatusPublished

This text of 140 P. 1032 (Briggs 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

Briggs v. State, 140 P. 1032, 10 Okla. Crim. 688, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 116 (Okla. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CUEIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Will Briggs, was convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Cleveland county, on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor with the intent to sell the same and liis punishment fixed at a fine of two hundred fifty dollars and imprisonment in the county jail for a period of ninety days. An appeal was filed in this court on the 3d day of May, 1913. ' On the 22d day of September, 1913, the Attorney General filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the plaintiff in error had become a fugitive from justice and not amenable to any order of the court made in this case. Satisfactory showing is made that the motion is well founded. No response has been made to the showing made by the state. The motion is sustained and the appeal is dismissed. Mandate forthwith.

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

PEE CUEIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Will Briggs, was convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Cleveland county, on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor with the intent to sell the same and liis punishment fixed at a fine of two hundred fifty dollars and imprisonment in the county jail for a period of ninety days. An appeal was filed in this court on the 3d day of May, 1913. ' On the 22d day of September, 1913, the Attorney General filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the plaintiff in error had become a fugitive from justice and not amenable to any order of the court made in this case. Satisfactory showing is made that the motion is well founded. No response has been made to the showing made by the state. The motion is sustained and the appeal is dismissed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 P. 1032, 10 Okla. Crim. 688, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/briggs-v-state-oklacrimapp-1914.