Dulaney v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Dulaney v. State

1915 OK CR 84, 145 P. 1109, 11 Okla. Crim. 280, 1915 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 84

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided February 6, 1915·No. No. A-2192.·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted on an information charging the selling of intoxicating liquor to one John Johnson. On the 5th day of November, 1913, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, he was by the court sentenced to be confined in the county jail for a term of 90 days and to pay a fine of $50.

No briefs have been filed, and when the case was called for final submission no appearance was made on behalf of the plaintiff in error. Thereupon the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal.

We have examined the record proper, and have discovered no error that will warrant a reversal of the judgment. The motion to affirm is therefore sustained.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted on an information charging the selling of intoxicating liquor to one John Johnson. On the 5th day of November, 1913, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, he was by the court sentenced to be confined in the county jail for a term of 90 days and to pay a fine of $50.

No briefs have been filed, and when the case was called for final submission no appearance was made on behalf of the plaintiff in error. Thereupon the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal.

We have examined the record proper, and have discovered no error that will warrant a reversal of the judgment. The motion to affirm is therefore sustained.

Dulaney v. State, 1915 OK CR 84, 145 P. 1109, 11 Okla. Crim. 280, 1915 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 84 (Okla. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

1915 OK CR 84 (Dulaney v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.