Futrell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Futrell v. State

1931 OK CR 432, 3 P.2d 1117, 52 Okla. Crim. 149, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 437

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 25, 1931

DocketNo. A-8055.

StatusPublished

This text of 1931 OK CR 432 (Futrell 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

Futrell v. State, 1931 OK CR 432, 3 P.2d 1117, 52 Okla. Crim. 149, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 437 (Okla. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

CHAPPELL, J.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of McCur-tain county of the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed by the jury at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in the county jail for 30 days.

The evidence of the state was that the officers had a search warrant for the premises of one Jack Herron, who lived about a mile from the home of defendant; that, after *150 searching Herron’s premises, they went around through the pasture and woodlands of defendant and about a quarter of a mile from his house found a barrel containing about 55 gallons of whisky, located near a still site; that this barrel was painted black and was within the boundaries of the premises where defendant lived; that they had no search Avarrant for these premises; that, after finding the barrel of whisky, they went up to defendant’s house and arrested him; that in the yard at defendant’s home Avere barrels and kegs similar to the one found in the field and painted black.

Defendant did not take the witness stand and offered no evidence.

The only error complained of is that this evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

There is no merit in this contention. The cause is therefore affirmed.

DAVENPORT, P. J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.

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

CHAPPELL, J.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of McCur-tain county of the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed by the jury at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in the county jail for 30 days.

The evidence of the state was that the officers had a search warrant for the premises of one Jack Herron, who lived about a mile from the home of defendant; that, after *150 searching Herron’s premises, they went around through the pasture and woodlands of defendant and about a quarter of a mile from his house found a barrel containing about 55 gallons of whisky, located near a still site; that this barrel was painted black and was within the boundaries of the premises where defendant lived; that they had no search Avarrant for these premises; that, after finding the barrel of whisky, they went up to defendant’s house and arrested him; that in the yard at defendant’s home Avere barrels and kegs similar to the one found in the field and painted black.

Defendant did not take the witness stand and offered no evidence.

The only error complained of is that this evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

There is no merit in this contention. The cause is therefore affirmed.

DAVENPORT, P. J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1931 OK CR 432, 3 P.2d 1117, 52 Okla. Crim. 149, 1931 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/futrell-v-state-oklacrimapp-1931.