Dorser v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Dorser v. State

1920 OK CR 25, 186 P. 1098, 17 Okla. Crim. 702, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 29

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 7, 1920

DocketNo. A-3369.

StatusPublished

This text of 1920 OK CR 25 (Dorser 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

Dorser v. State, 1920 OK CR 25, 186 P. 1098, 17 Okla. Crim. 702, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 29 (Okla. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

*703 PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Joe Dorser, was convicted on an information charging that he did unlawfully have in his possession 14 quarts of whisky with the intention of selling the same, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for four months and a fine of $300. Prom the judgment he appealed by filing in this court on May 22. 1918 a petition in error with case-made. No brief has been filed. When the case was called for final submission, the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal. It appearing that the appeal herein is destitute of merit, and has apparently been abandoned, the motion to affirm will be sustained. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

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

*703 PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Joe Dorser, was convicted on an information charging that he did unlawfully have in his possession 14 quarts of whisky with the intention of selling the same, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for four months and a fine of $300. Prom the judgment he appealed by filing in this court on May 22. 1918 a petition in error with case-made. No brief has been filed. When the case was called for final submission, the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal. It appearing that the appeal herein is destitute of merit, and has apparently been abandoned, the motion to affirm will be sustained. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1920 OK CR 25, 186 P. 1098, 17 Okla. Crim. 702, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorser-v-state-oklacrimapp-1920.