Ford v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ford v. State

1920 OK CR 60, 187 P. 251, 17 Okla. Crim. 706, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 36

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided April 3, 1920·No. No. A-3381.·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, A. Ford, was convicted on an information charging that he did unlawfully have possession of one quart of whisky wi-tli the intention of selling, bartering, giving away and otherwise furnishing the same, and in accordance with the verdict of the jury he was sentenced to be confined for 90 days in (lie county jail and to pay a fine of $300 and the cost. The sufficiency of the testimony to support the conviction is the only question raised.

The'testimony on the part of the state, if credited, as it was by the jury, was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict. Finging no reversible error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, A. Ford, was convicted on an information charging that he did unlawfully have possession of one quart of whisky wi-tli the intention of selling, bartering, giving away and otherwise furnishing the same, and in accordance with the verdict of the jury he was sentenced to be confined for 90 days in (lie county jail and to pay a fine of $300 and the cost. The sufficiency of the testimony to support the conviction is the only question raised.

The'testimony on the part of the state, if credited, as it was by the jury, was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict. Finging no reversible error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.

Ford v. State, 1920 OK CR 60, 187 P. 251, 17 Okla. Crim. 706, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 36 (Okla. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

1920 OK CR 60 (Ford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.