Evans v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Evans v. State

1931 OK CR 73, 296 P. 1115, 50 Okla. Crim. 55, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 114

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 7, 1931

DocketNo. A-7521.

StatusPublished

This text of 1931 OK CR 73 (Evans 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

Evans v. State, 1931 OK CR 73, 296 P. 1115, 50 Okla. Crim. 55, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 114 (Okla. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Greer county on a charge of selling whisky, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and to serve 30 days in the county jail.

The testimony for the state is that at the time charged defendant delivered to one Irene Hill a half gallon of whis-ky for the purpose of her delivering the same to one Mc-Carter. She was apprehended by a deputy sheriff who seized the whisky. Complaint is made that the court too closely restricted the cross-examination of the witness Irene Hill in not permitting the defense to show her interest in the case. There is some merit to the contention, but upon the whole record the guilt of defendant is so apparent that this error does not require a reversal. It is also insisted that the giving of an instruction on alibi was *56 error. Defendant testified that lie was at the place where the witness Irene Hill testified she procured the whisky, but that she did not come to that place and he did not see her. This is in effect a defense of alibi; it amounts to testimony that defendant was at a different place from that where the whisky was obtained. There could have been no prejudice in the instruction.

The case is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Greer county on a charge of selling whisky, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and to serve 30 days in the county jail.

The testimony for the state is that at the time charged defendant delivered to one Irene Hill a half gallon of whis-ky for the purpose of her delivering the same to one Mc-Carter. She was apprehended by a deputy sheriff who seized the whisky. Complaint is made that the court too closely restricted the cross-examination of the witness Irene Hill in not permitting the defense to show her interest in the case. There is some merit to the contention, but upon the whole record the guilt of defendant is so apparent that this error does not require a reversal. It is also insisted that the giving of an instruction on alibi was *56 error. Defendant testified that lie was at the place where the witness Irene Hill testified she procured the whisky, but that she did not come to that place and he did not see her. This is in effect a defense of alibi; it amounts to testimony that defendant was at a different place from that where the whisky was obtained. There could have been no prejudice in the instruction.

The case is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1931 OK CR 73, 296 P. 1115, 50 Okla. Crim. 55, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-state-oklacrimapp-1931.