Gardner v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Gardner v. State

144 P. 1197, 10 Okla. Crim. 687, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 202

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 28, 1914

DocketNo. A-2219.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 144 P. 1197 (Gardner 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

Gardner v. State, 144 P. 1197, 10 Okla. Crim. 687, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 202 (Okla. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is prosecuted from a conviction had in the county court of Comanche county, on the 7th day of Pebruary, of this year, in which plaintiff in error was found guilty of conducting-a gambling game. The petition in error with case-made was filed in this court on March 25, 1914. The next day the Attorney General filed a confession of error, which, omitting the title, reads as follows: "Comes now the state of Oklahoma by the Attorney General and respectfully calls this honorable court’s attention to the charging part of the information filed in this ease, which is as follows: "On the 16th day of August, 1913, Val Gardner then and there being, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully conduct as owner there of a game of roulette for money, checks and credit,” etc. To this information the defendant filed a demurrer upon the ground that the facts stated in said information did not constitute a public offense. This demurrer was overruled by the court, to which ruling the defendant exeepted at the time, and the error of the court in so overruling the demurrer was set up in the motion for new trial, as well as in the motion in arrest of judgment, and the motion for a new trial was overruled, to which the defendant exeepted, and the ruling of the court as afore *688 said is assigned as error in the petition in error filed in this ease. Under the holding of this court in the ease of Brown v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 41, Morgan et al. v. State, 7 Okla. Cr. 45, and Proctor v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 81, the overruling of this demurrer constitutes reversible error, for the information must allege that those who played at the game, so conducted, played for money or some representative of value. Por the above reason the Attorney General believes that under the holdings of this court sufficient error appears of record to require a reversal of this judgment, and confesses error accordingly, and moves the court for a speedy’disposition of the case.-’' We are of opinion that the confession of error is well founded, and should be sustained. The judgment of conviction herein is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded with direction to sustain the demurrer to the information. Mandate forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is prosecuted from a conviction had in the county court of Comanche county, on the 7th day of Pebruary, of this year, in which plaintiff in error was found guilty of conducting-a gambling game. The petition in error with case-made was filed in this court on March 25, 1914. The next day the Attorney General filed a confession of error, which, omitting the title, reads as follows: "Comes now the state of Oklahoma by the Attorney General and respectfully calls this honorable court’s attention to the charging part of the information filed in this ease, which is as follows: "On the 16th day of August, 1913, Val Gardner then and there being, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully conduct as owner there of a game of roulette for money, checks and credit,” etc. To this information the defendant filed a demurrer upon the ground that the facts stated in said information did not constitute a public offense. This demurrer was overruled by the court, to which ruling the defendant exeepted at the time, and the error of the court in so overruling the demurrer was set up in the motion for new trial, as well as in the motion in arrest of judgment, and the motion for a new trial was overruled, to which the defendant exeepted, and the ruling of the court as afore *688 said is assigned as error in the petition in error filed in this ease. Under the holding of this court in the ease of Brown v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 41, Morgan et al. v. State, 7 Okla. Cr. 45, and Proctor v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 81, the overruling of this demurrer constitutes reversible error, for the information must allege that those who played at the game, so conducted, played for money or some representative of value. Por the above reason the Attorney General believes that under the holdings of this court sufficient error appears of record to require a reversal of this judgment, and confesses error accordingly, and moves the court for a speedy’disposition of the case.-’' We are of opinion that the confession of error is well founded, and should be sustained. The judgment of conviction herein is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded with direction to sustain the demurrer to the information. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 P. 1197, 10 Okla. Crim. 687, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-state-oklacrimapp-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack