Folley v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Folley v. State

1926 OK CR 396, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 339, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 399

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 27, 1926

DocketNo. A-6335.

StatusPublished

This text of 1926 OK CR 396 (Folley 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

Folley v. State, 1926 OK CR 396, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 339, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 399 (Okla. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

BESSEY, P. J.

Lee Folley, plaintiff in error, was convicted of the crime of robbery by use of firearms, with his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of seven years, and he appeals. The plaintiff in error was unable to give a supersedeas bond pending appeal, as required by the court, and for some months has been incarcerated in the penitentiary at McAlester. By a communication received from plaintiff in error, it is made to appear that he desires to abandon the appeal and asks that the appeal be dismissed. A cursory examination of the record indicates that there is no merit in the appeal. The request is granted, and the appeal is dismissed and a mandate ordered forthwith, directing the warden of the penitentiary to execute the judgment of the trial court, according to its terms.

DOYLE and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

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

BESSEY, P. J.

Lee Folley, plaintiff in error, was convicted of the crime of robbery by use of firearms, with his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of seven years, and he appeals. The plaintiff in error was unable to give a supersedeas bond pending appeal, as required by the court, and for some months has been incarcerated in the penitentiary at McAlester. By a communication received from plaintiff in error, it is made to appear that he desires to abandon the appeal and asks that the appeal be dismissed. A cursory examination of the record indicates that there is no merit in the appeal. The request is granted, and the appeal is dismissed and a mandate ordered forthwith, directing the warden of the penitentiary to execute the judgment of the trial court, according to its terms.

DOYLE and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1926 OK CR 396, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 339, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/folley-v-state-oklacrimapp-1926.