Ford v. State

1912 OK CR 9, 120 P. 300, 6 Okla. Crim. 519, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 311
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
DecidedJanuary 11, 1912
DocketNo. A-934.
StatusPublished
Cited by43 cases

This text of 1912 OK CR 9 (Ford 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
Ford v. State, 1912 OK CR 9, 120 P. 300, 6 Okla. Crim. 519, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 311 (Okla. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

ARMSTRONG, J.

Plaintiffs in error were tried at the April, 1910, term of the district court of Wagoner county on a charge of assault with a dangerous weapon with intent to do bodily harm, and were convicted on the 23d day of April, 1910. Thereafter, on the 30th day of said month, they were sentenced to imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of 2% years.

The appeal was filed in this court on the 25th day of October, 1910. No petition in error and no brief have been filed on behalf of plaintiffs in error. This cause was assigned for oral argument on the 6th day of anuary, 1912. On that date no appearance was made on behalf of plaintiffs in error for oral argument, and the Assistant Attorney General on behalf of the state, moved to affirm for want of prosecution.

The motion is well taken. When an appeal is taken from a judgment of a trial court, and no petition in error is filed and no brief filed on behalf of appellant, and no appearance made for oral argument, such appeal is considered as abandoned, and will be af *520 firmed, on motion of the Attorney General or his proper representative. See Mingle v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 535, 115 Pac. 616; Price v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 147, 113 Pac. 1061; Henson v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 6, 113 Pac. 224; and many others.

The record has been carefully examined, and we are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed. It is so ordered. The clerk will issue mandate forthwith.

FURMAN, P. J., and DOYLE, J., concur.

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

Related

Bell v. State
1974 OK CR 188 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1974)
Oxendine v. State
1960 OK CR 26 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1960)
Shetsky v. State
1955 OK CR 117 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1955)
Holcomb v. State
1952 OK CR 1 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1952)
State v. Bennett
1945 OK CR 104 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1945)
Stone v. State
1945 OK CR 35 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1945)
Mannon v. State
1939 OK CR 159 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1939)
Anderson v. State
1939 OK CR 64 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1939)
Clark v. State
73 P.2d 481 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1937)
Evinger v. State
1935 OK CR 53 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1935)
State v. Capaci
154 So. 419 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1934)
Johnson v. State
1933 OK CR 97 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1933)
State v. Reding
13 P.2d 253 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1932)
State v. Taylor
139 So. 463 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1931)
Edwards v. State
1930 OK CR 48 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1930)
Elliott v. State
1929 OK CR 255 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1929)
Brown v. State
1929 OK CR 36 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1929)
Sanders v. State
1926 OK CR 339 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1926)
Gandy v. State
1926 OK CR 214 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1926)
Carle v. State
1926 OK CR 137 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1912 OK CR 9, 120 P. 300, 6 Okla. Crim. 519, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-state-oklacrimapp-1912.