Cogle v. State

1921 OK CR 207, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 100, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 139
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
DecidedNovember 2, 1921
DocketNo. A-3751.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1921 OK CR 207 (Cogle 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
Cogle v. State, 1921 OK CR 207, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 100, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 139 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Opinion

DOYLE, P. J.

This appeal is from a judgment rendered upon the verdict of a jury finding appellant guilty of the crime of grand larceny and fixing his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentiary for the term of five years. The information filed June 25, 1919, jointly charged appellant, Johnnie Cogle, and one Millard Gentry with the theft of one Cadillac automobile, of the value of $3,600, the personal property of A. L. Farmer. When the case was called for trial on September 30, 1919, appellant asked and was granted a severance. Thereupon the jury was impaneled to try the case, which trial resulted in a verdict as above stated.

On October 10, 1919, judgment was rendered. The appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 10, 1920, a petition in error with case-made. No brief has been filed, when the case was called for final submission it was submitted on the record, and we have nothing before us but the petition in error and case-made. The errors assigned are that the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence, and that the court erred *101 In its rulings in the admission and the rejection of evidence to the prejudice of the defendant. We have read and examined the entire record in this case, and we do not find any objections made or exceptions saved to the admission or rejection of testimony. We have also examined the information and instructions of the court, and the judgment, and we have discovered no error which will warrant a reversal of the judgment, and we find that the evidence sustains the verdict and judgment of conviction, and our conclusion is that this appeal is without merit.

The judgment of the district court of Tulsa county is therefore affirmed.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur,

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

Related

Gentry v. State
1921 OK CR 208 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1921 OK CR 207, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 100, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cogle-v-state-oklacrimapp-1921.