Davis v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Davis v. State

1923 OK CR 154, 215 P. 795, 24 Okla. Crim. 47, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 239

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 15, 1923

DocketNo. A-4213.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 154 (Davis 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

Davis v. State, 1923 OK CR 154, 215 P. 795, 24 Okla. Crim. 47, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 239 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

MATSON, P. J.

This is an appeal from the county court of Oklahoma county, wherein, on the 22d day of October, 1921, the plaintiff in error was convicted of the crime of unlawfully conveying intoxicating liquors and sentenced to pay a fine of $50 and to be imprisoned in the county jail for a period of 30 days.

The cause was submitted on the 22d day of May,. 1923, at which time no brief had been filed on behalf of plaintiff in error, but counsel for plaintiff in error appeared in open court and requested additional time in which to file a brief in this case, and,, for good cause shown, at that time counsel wasi allowed 15 days from the 22d day of May, 1923, in which to file brief in this cause. The time granted plaintiff in error has expired, and no brief has been filed nor any showing made as to why the order of the court was not complied with.

*48 An. examination of the pleadings, instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence disclose no prejudicial error.

The judgment is therefore affirmed under rule 9 of this court (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x).

BESSEY and DOYLE, JJ., concur.

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

MATSON, P. J.

This is an appeal from the county court of Oklahoma county, wherein, on the 22d day of October, 1921, the plaintiff in error was convicted of the crime of unlawfully conveying intoxicating liquors and sentenced to pay a fine of $50 and to be imprisoned in the county jail for a period of 30 days.

The cause was submitted on the 22d day of May,. 1923, at which time no brief had been filed on behalf of plaintiff in error, but counsel for plaintiff in error appeared in open court and requested additional time in which to file a brief in this case, and,, for good cause shown, at that time counsel wasi allowed 15 days from the 22d day of May, 1923, in which to file brief in this cause. The time granted plaintiff in error has expired, and no brief has been filed nor any showing made as to why the order of the court was not complied with.

*48 An. examination of the pleadings, instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence disclose no prejudicial error.

The judgment is therefore affirmed under rule 9 of this court (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x).

BESSEY and DOYLE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 154, 215 P. 795, 24 Okla. Crim. 47, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.