Gentry v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Gentry v. State

1921 OK CR 208, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 102, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 138

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 3, 1921

DocketNo. A-3753.

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK CR 208 (Gentry 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

Gentry v. State, 1921 OK CR 208, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 102, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 138 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

DOYLE, P. J.

Plaintiff in error, Millard Gentry, was Jried, convicted, and sentenced to serve a term of five years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary upon an information jointly charging him and one Johnnie Cogle with the theft of a Cadillac automobile of the value of $3,600, the personal property of A. L. Farmer. On October 13, 1919, judgment was rendered. The appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 10, 1920, a petition in error with case-made.

No brief,has been filed, and no appearance made on behalf of plaintiff in error in this court. When the - case was called for final submission it was submitted on. the record, and we have- nothing before us but the petition in error and ease-made.

The errors assigned are that the verdict is contrary to law and to the evidence, and that the court erred in admitting certain testimony over the objection of the defendant, and erred in refusing to admit certain testimony offered by the defendant. The case is /a companion case to that of Cogle v. State, 19 Okla. Cr. 100, 201 Pac. 530. The errors assigned based upon the exceptions taken to rulings of the court upon evidence offered and rejected are without merit, and we find that the evidence sustains the verdict and judgment of conviction.

Having discovered no error which will warrant a reversal, the judgment of the district court of Tulsa county is affirmed.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur.

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

DOYLE, P. J.

Plaintiff in error, Millard Gentry, was Jried, convicted, and sentenced to serve a term of five years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary upon an information jointly charging him and one Johnnie Cogle with the theft of a Cadillac automobile of the value of $3,600, the personal property of A. L. Farmer. On October 13, 1919, judgment was rendered. The appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 10, 1920, a petition in error with case-made.

No brief,has been filed, and no appearance made on behalf of plaintiff in error in this court. When the - case was called for final submission it was submitted on. the record, and we have- nothing before us but the petition in error and ease-made.

The errors assigned are that the verdict is contrary to law and to the evidence, and that the court erred in admitting certain testimony over the objection of the defendant, and erred in refusing to admit certain testimony offered by the defendant. The case is /a companion case to that of Cogle v. State, 19 Okla. Cr. 100, 201 Pac. 530. The errors assigned based upon the exceptions taken to rulings of the court upon evidence offered and rejected are without merit, and we find that the evidence sustains the verdict and judgment of conviction.

Having discovered no error which will warrant a reversal, the judgment of the district court of Tulsa county is affirmed.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 208, 201 P. 530, 20 Okla. Crim. 102, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentry-v-state-oklacrimapp-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack