Burke v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Burke v. State

1932 OK CR 200, 16 P.2d 1118, 54 Okla. Crim. 157, 1932 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 205

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 18, 1932

DocketNo. A-8430.

StatusPublished

This text of 1932 OK CR 200 (Burke 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

Burke v. State, 1932 OK CR 200, 16 P.2d 1118, 54 Okla. Crim. 157, 1932 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 205 (Okla. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

*158 PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs in error, C. E. Burke and R. C. Clark, were by information jointly charged with John W. Luppy, of obtaining money under false pretense; C. E. Burke and R. C. Clark were tried jointly, convicted, and sentenced as follows: The punishment of C. E. Burke was fixed by the jury at six years in the state penitentiary and a fine of $500; the punishment of R. C. Clark, three years in the state penitentiary.

The record in this case was filed in this court on June 16, 1932; no brief has been filed in support of the defendants’ assignment of errors. A careful examination of the record discloses no fundamental errors, and the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

The case is therefore affirmed.

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

*158 PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs in error, C. E. Burke and R. C. Clark, were by information jointly charged with John W. Luppy, of obtaining money under false pretense; C. E. Burke and R. C. Clark were tried jointly, convicted, and sentenced as follows: The punishment of C. E. Burke was fixed by the jury at six years in the state penitentiary and a fine of $500; the punishment of R. C. Clark, three years in the state penitentiary.

The record in this case was filed in this court on June 16, 1932; no brief has been filed in support of the defendants’ assignment of errors. A careful examination of the record discloses no fundamental errors, and the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

The case is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1932 OK CR 200, 16 P.2d 1118, 54 Okla. Crim. 157, 1932 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burke-v-state-oklacrimapp-1932.