Daniels v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Daniels v. State

1929 OK CR 243, 278 P. 400, 43 Okla. Crim. 347, 1929 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 259

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 22, 1929

DocketNo. A-6724.

StatusPublished

This text of 1929 OK CR 243 (Daniels 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

Daniels v. State, 1929 OK CR 243, 278 P. 400, 43 Okla. Crim. 347, 1929 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 259 (Okla. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

EDWARDS,' P. J.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the district court of Washington county of burglary in the second degree and his punishment fixed at seven years in the state penitentiary.

The judgment was rendered in February, 1927, and the appeal was lodged in this court in August, 1927. No briefs in support of the appeal have been filed, and no appearance for oral argument was made at the time the case was submitted. It has been many times held by this court that where an appeal from a felony is prosecuted and no briefs are filed nor oral argument made, the court will examine the record for jurisdictional and fundamental errors and to ascertain if the evidence reasonably sustains the judgment. If no such errors appear and the evidence is sufficient, the case will be affirmed.

An examination of this record discloses no reason for a reversal. We are of the opinion, however, that the punishment assessed is excessive under all the circumstances. The judgment is, therefore, modified by reducing the punishment to five years in the penitentiary, and, as modified, the case is affirmed.

DAVENPORT and CHAPPELL. JJ.. concur.

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

EDWARDS,' P. J.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the district court of Washington county of burglary in the second degree and his punishment fixed at seven years in the state penitentiary.

The judgment was rendered in February, 1927, and the appeal was lodged in this court in August, 1927. No briefs in support of the appeal have been filed, and no appearance for oral argument was made at the time the case was submitted. It has been many times held by this court that where an appeal from a felony is prosecuted and no briefs are filed nor oral argument made, the court will examine the record for jurisdictional and fundamental errors and to ascertain if the evidence reasonably sustains the judgment. If no such errors appear and the evidence is sufficient, the case will be affirmed.

An examination of this record discloses no reason for a reversal. We are of the opinion, however, that the punishment assessed is excessive under all the circumstances. The judgment is, therefore, modified by reducing the punishment to five years in the penitentiary, and, as modified, the case is affirmed.

DAVENPORT and CHAPPELL. JJ.. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1929 OK CR 243, 278 P. 400, 43 Okla. Crim. 347, 1929 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniels-v-state-oklacrimapp-1929.