Flanagan v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Flanagan v. State

1925 OK CR 420, 240 P. 132, 32 Okla. Crim. 172, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 472

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided July 28, 1925·No. No. A-5092.·Published

Opinion

DOYLE, J.

The plaintiff in error was tried and convicted, and, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, was sentenced to pay a fine of $350 and be confined for 60 days in the county jail on an information charging that in McCurtain county, August 17, 1923', 'Carl Flanagan did sell one quart of whisky to Willie Morris, Monroe Hilton, and Roscoe Hines.

A reversal of the judgment' is asked on tne ground •that the court erred in admitting certain testimony, and that the verdict is not sustained by sufficient evidence.

The state introduced five witnesses. An examination *173 of the record shows no exception taken to the rulings of the court on the admission of evidence. The defendant did not testify, and no evidence whatever was introduced on the part of the defense. There can be no doubt as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction.

Finding no prejudicial error, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

BESSEY, P. J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.

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

DOYLE, J.

The plaintiff in error was tried and convicted, and, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, was sentenced to pay a fine of $350 and be confined for 60 days in the county jail on an information charging that in McCurtain county, August 17, 1923', 'Carl Flanagan did sell one quart of whisky to Willie Morris, Monroe Hilton, and Roscoe Hines.

A reversal of the judgment' is asked on tne ground •that the court erred in admitting certain testimony, and that the verdict is not sustained by sufficient evidence.

The state introduced five witnesses. An examination *173 of the record shows no exception taken to the rulings of the court on the admission of evidence. The defendant did not testify, and no evidence whatever was introduced on the part of the defense. There can be no doubt as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction.

Finding no prejudicial error, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

BESSEY, P. J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.

Flanagan v. State, 1925 OK CR 420, 240 P. 132, 32 Okla. Crim. 172, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 472 (Okla. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

1925 OK CR 420 (Flanagan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.