Hall v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hall v. State

1962 OK CR 1, 366 P.2d 973, 1962 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 292

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 10, 1962

DocketNo. A-13110

StatusPublished

This text of 1962 OK CR 1 (Hall 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

Hall v. State, 1962 OK CR 1, 366 P.2d 973, 1962 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 292 (Okla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

BUSSEY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment and sentence based on an information filed in the District Court of Tulsa county, Oklahoma, charging that Clarence Hall “did unlawfully, lewdly and feloniously, expose his person and private parts in a place, to-wit: Pee Wee Park in the City of Sand Springs in Tulsa County, Oklahoma, and in a place where there were present other persons to be offended and annoyed thereby, * * * ” On April 26, 1961, defendant was arraigned and plead not guilty. Case was set for trial on June 8, 1961. On this date a jury was impaneled and the state introduced its evidence. At the conclusion of same defendant entered a plea of guilty to “outraging public decency”, and on June 29, 1961, the court pronounced sentence at 6 months in the county jail. From this judgment and sentence this appeal has been perfected.

Defendant waived his oral argument which was set for November 29, 1961, and no brief has been filed. Under these conditions this court has repeatedly held that we can search the record only for fundamental error and none being found the judgment and sentence will be affirmed. Riner v. State, 82 Okl.Cr. 442, 172 P.2d 345; Hulsey v. State, 82 Okl.Cr. 332, 169 P.2d 771; Epps v. State, 69 Okl.Cr. 460, 104 P.2d 262.

We have carefully examined the transcript and find no fundamental error. This appeal is therefore Affirmed.

NIX, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.

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

BUSSEY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment and sentence based on an information filed in the District Court of Tulsa county, Oklahoma, charging that Clarence Hall “did unlawfully, lewdly and feloniously, expose his person and private parts in a place, to-wit: Pee Wee Park in the City of Sand Springs in Tulsa County, Oklahoma, and in a place where there were present other persons to be offended and annoyed thereby, * * * ” On April 26, 1961, defendant was arraigned and plead not guilty. Case was set for trial on June 8, 1961. On this date a jury was impaneled and the state introduced its evidence. At the conclusion of same defendant entered a plea of guilty to “outraging public decency”, and on June 29, 1961, the court pronounced sentence at 6 months in the county jail. From this judgment and sentence this appeal has been perfected.

Defendant waived his oral argument which was set for November 29, 1961, and no brief has been filed. Under these conditions this court has repeatedly held that we can search the record only for fundamental error and none being found the judgment and sentence will be affirmed. Riner v. State, 82 Okl.Cr. 442, 172 P.2d 345; Hulsey v. State, 82 Okl.Cr. 332, 169 P.2d 771; Epps v. State, 69 Okl.Cr. 460, 104 P.2d 262.

We have carefully examined the transcript and find no fundamental error. This appeal is therefore Affirmed.

NIX, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1962 OK CR 1, 366 P.2d 973, 1962 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-state-oklacrimapp-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack