Carson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Carson v. State

1923 OK CR 172, 215 P. 961, 24 Okla. Crim. 71, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 246

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 23, 1923

DocketNo. A-4201.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 172 (Carson 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

Carson v. State, 1923 OK CR 172, 215 P. 961, 24 Okla. Crim. 71, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 246 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joe Carson, plaintiff in error was by information filed in the district court of Beckham county June 22, 1921, charged with the crime of burglary by breaking into a box car and carrying away a parcel of cured meat, of the value of $30, with the intent to deprive the owner of the meat and convert the same to his own use and benefit. At the trial, August 5, 1921, he was by a verdict of the jury found guilty as charged, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

This case was regularly submitted for briefs and oral argument. The plaintiff ini error has filed no brief pursuant to *72 the orders and rules of this court, and it may therefore be assumed that he has abandoned his appeal. Upon motion of the Attorney General that the judgment of the lower court be affirmed fon failure to prosecute the appeal, 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.

Joe Carson, plaintiff in error was by information filed in the district court of Beckham county June 22, 1921, charged with the crime of burglary by breaking into a box car and carrying away a parcel of cured meat, of the value of $30, with the intent to deprive the owner of the meat and convert the same to his own use and benefit. At the trial, August 5, 1921, he was by a verdict of the jury found guilty as charged, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

This case was regularly submitted for briefs and oral argument. The plaintiff ini error has filed no brief pursuant to *72 the orders and rules of this court, and it may therefore be assumed that he has abandoned his appeal. Upon motion of the Attorney General that the judgment of the lower court be affirmed fon failure to prosecute the appeal, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 172, 215 P. 961, 24 Okla. Crim. 71, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carson-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.