Griffith v. Page

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Griffith v. Page

1971 OK CR 291, 488 P.2d 381

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 31, 1971

DocketNo. A-16781

StatusPublished

This text of 1971 OK CR 291 (Griffith v. Page) 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

Griffith v. Page, 1971 OK CR 291, 488 P.2d 381 (Okla. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from an Order denying post conviction relief in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. CRF-69-671. The above styled and numbered cause was filed in this Court on the 9th day of July, 1971. The Order denying [382]*382post conviction relief was entered on the 8th day of January, 1971. In said Order of the trial court, the following is recited:

"Defendant voluntarily entered a plea of guilty to the charge as reduced. He was represented by an able lawyer. That defendant has no basis in fact or law for a change in the judgment and sentence. DENIED.”

It is readily apparent from the findings of the trial court that had the Petition been timely filed the petitioner would not have been entitled to any relief. We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s denial of post conviction relief. Affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ., concur.

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

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from an Order denying post conviction relief in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. CRF-69-671. The above styled and numbered cause was filed in this Court on the 9th day of July, 1971. The Order denying [382]*382post conviction relief was entered on the 8th day of January, 1971. In said Order of the trial court, the following is recited:

"Defendant voluntarily entered a plea of guilty to the charge as reduced. He was represented by an able lawyer. That defendant has no basis in fact or law for a change in the judgment and sentence. DENIED.”

It is readily apparent from the findings of the trial court that had the Petition been timely filed the petitioner would not have been entitled to any relief. We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s denial of post conviction relief. Affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1971 OK CR 291, 488 P.2d 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffith-v-page-oklacrimapp-1971.