Dozier v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Dozier v. State

1971 OK CR 117, 482 P.2d 952

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 17, 1971

DocketNo. A-15908

StatusPublished

This text of 1971 OK CR 117 (Dozier 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

Dozier v. State, 1971 OK CR 117, 482 P.2d 952 (Okla. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

Theodore Dwayne Dozier, hereinafter referred to as defendant, plead guilty in the District Court of Tulsa County to the offense of Larceny of Merchandise from Retailer and was sentenced to one year imprisonment and from said judgment and sentence a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

The defendant’s Petition in Error contains two allegations of error, neither of which contain sufficient merit to be discussed in this opinion. We have carefully examined the record and find that the defendant, with counsel, voluntarily entered a plea of guilty with full knowledge of the consequences of such plea. We further find that the trial court had jurisdiction of the person, subject matter and authority under law to pronounce the judgment and sentence, which was well within the limits provided by law. For the reasons above set forth, the judgment and sentence is hereby, affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ., concur.

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

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

Theodore Dwayne Dozier, hereinafter referred to as defendant, plead guilty in the District Court of Tulsa County to the offense of Larceny of Merchandise from Retailer and was sentenced to one year imprisonment and from said judgment and sentence a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

The defendant’s Petition in Error contains two allegations of error, neither of which contain sufficient merit to be discussed in this opinion. We have carefully examined the record and find that the defendant, with counsel, voluntarily entered a plea of guilty with full knowledge of the consequences of such plea. We further find that the trial court had jurisdiction of the person, subject matter and authority under law to pronounce the judgment and sentence, which was well within the limits provided by law. For the reasons above set forth, the judgment and sentence is hereby, affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1971 OK CR 117, 482 P.2d 952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dozier-v-state-oklacrimapp-1971.