Greenwood v. State

375 P.2d 661
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
DecidedOctober 22, 1962
DocketA-13194
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 375 P.2d 661 (Greenwood 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
Greenwood v. State, 375 P.2d 661 (Okla. Ct. App. 1962).

Opinion

BUSSEY, Judge.

G. D. Greenwood was charged, tried and convicted of the offense of Obtaining Property Under False Pretenses by use of a False and Fraudulent Check in the District Court of Dewey County. Defendant seeks to appeal to this Court by casemade.

The Attorney General has filed a Motion to Dismiss said appeal on the ground and for the reason that the casemade does not contain a copy of the formal judgment and sentence as required by law.

The plaintiff in error relies upon an instrument denominated, “Journal Entry”, found at Page 125 of the casemade, and argues that although it is not a model to be followed in the future, it is sufficient in form and substance to be treated as a formal judgment and sentence. The instrument in question reads as follows:

“Now to-wit, on this 31st day of October, 1961, this cause comes on to be heard upon the issues joined herein and for trial.
“The State of Oklahoma appears by Tom J. Ruble, Acting County Attorney, and E. Blumhagen, special prosecutor, and the defendant, G. D. Greenwood appears in person and by his attorneys, J. C. Drennan and John L. Pollard.
“Thereupon parties announce ready for trial and a jury is duly drawn, im-panelled, and sworn to try the said cause.
“The prosecution thereupon makes their opening statement to the jury and the defendant reserves his opening statement until the close of the testimony offered by the prosecution.
“Thereupon prosecution proceeds to introduce their evidence and conclude their testimony and rest their case in chief, and the defendant demurs to the evidence as offered by the prosecution which demurrer is argued and considered by the Court, and overruled by the Court, to which ruling of the Court the defendant objects and excepts, and exception is allowed by the Court.
“Thereupon the defendant introduces his evidence and rests his case, and the prosecution introduces their rebuttal and both plaintiff and defendant having rested their case, the defendant moves the Court for an instructed verdict and ask the Court to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty in favor of the defendant, the same being argued to the Court, and considered by the Court and thereupon overruled, to which ruling the defendant objects and excepts, and exception is allowed.
“Thereupon the Court instructs the jury as to the law and the case is argued to the jury by counsel, by the prosecution and by the defense, and thereupon the jury is sworn and placed in charge of the bailiff and on the same *663 day returned into Court the following verdict:
We, the jury drawn, empaneled and sivorn in the above entitled cause do upon our oaths find the defendant guilty as charged in the information herein and fix his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of 1 year and 1 day.
“M. W. Hendrix, Foreman”

to all of which the defendant, G. D. Greenwood objects and excepts.

“Thereupon and on the 7th day of December, 1961, at the hour of 1:30 o’clock P.M., the said prosecution appears by the same counsel and the defendant appears in person and by the same counsel and the said defendant,
G. D. Greenwood presents his Motion for New Trial which is considered by the Court, and thereupon overruled and denied to which ruling of the Court the said defendant excepts; and thereupon said defendant offers his Motion in Arrest of Judgment, which motion is considered by the Court and overruled and denied to which the defendant excepts; and thereu-pon the said defendant, G. D. Greenwood is called to stand up for sentence and to have the judgment of the Court pronounced upon him; and thereupon judgment is pronounced against the said G. D. Greenwood 'by the Court, and the said G. D. Greenwood is sentenced to be imprisoned in the Oklahoma State Penitentiary at McAlester, Oklahoma, for a period of one year ■ and one day to which the said defendant excepts and gives notice of his intention in open Court, to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State .of Oklahoma, and which notice the Court orders spread upon the records of this Court, as provided by law, and which is done.
“Thereupon for good cause shown • the time to make and serve a case made is extended and the said defendant is given sixty (60) days from this date to-wit, the 5th day of February, 1962, to make and serve a case made to the Court of Criminal Appeals and the prosecution is given five (5) days after the service of the case made to suggest amendments thereto and the same is to be settled and signed on three (3) days written notice by either party and the Court fixes the supersedeas bond of said defendant at $1,000.00 and the said defendant is given five (5) days in which to execute said supersedeas bond and said judgment is stayed for such period.
“Thereupon the defendant files his motion for preparation of a case made at court expense, said motion being duly supported by Affidavit and the Court being fully advised in the premises and having heard evidence in support of said motion finds that said defendant is destitute and without funds and unable to pay for a case made for the purpose of maintaining his appeal and that said defendant is entitled to have a case made made at court expense.
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED by the Court that a case made be made and prepared by the Court Reporter of this Court, at court expense.
“/s/ Tom R. Blaine,
“Judge of the District Court.”

We must therefore consider whether the instrument above cited meets the necessary requirements of a judgment and sentence under the prior decisions of this Court. If it does, the appeal was filed within the time prescribed by law, and the questions raised on appeal are properly before us. If it does not, we must sustain the motion of the attorney general to dismiss.

In this connection it will be helpful to consider the statute relating to judgment and sentence in a criminal case:

“An appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeals may be taken by the defendant, as a matter of right' from any *664 judgment 1 against him; and upon the appeal, any decision of the court, or intermediate order made in the progress of the case may be reviewed.” Title 22, OSA, § 1051.

In Jones v. Territory, 4 Okl. 45, 43 P. 1072, in Syllabus 4, this Court stated that:

“No particular language or form of words [are] necessary in rendering and recording a judgment of conviction in a criminal cause; and where the words ‘commanded b)f the court’ are used, instead of the usual form, ‘considered and adjudged by the court,’ it is sufficient on appeal.”

In Helms v. State, 14 Okl.Cr. 384, 171 P. 340, in an opinion written by Judge Doyle, this Court set forth three requisites of a judgment and sentence.

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

Related

Aguilar-Alvarez v. Holder
528 F. App'x 862 (Tenth Circuit, 2013)
Gonseth v. State
1994 OK CR 9 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1994)
Wade v. State
624 P.2d 86 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1981)
Opinion No. (1979)
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1979
Opinion No. 79-189 (1979) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1979
Sprouse v. State
1967 OK CR 167 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1967)
Morrow v. State
1967 OK CR 114 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1967)
Hensley v. State
1966 OK CR 21 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1966)
Dowdy v. State
1965 OK CR 140 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1965)
Treat v. State
1965 OK CR 141 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1965)
Lebrecht v. State
1965 OK CR 17 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1965)
Bowden v. State
1964 OK CR 67 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1964)
Greenwood v. State
1963 OK CR 46 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1963)
Bishop v. State
1963 OK CR 2 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
375 P.2d 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenwood-v-state-oklacrimapp-1962.