Hampton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hampton v. State

1926 OK CR 59, 243 P. 1118, 33 Okla. Crim. 291, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 74

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 27, 1926

DocketNo. A-5439.

StatusPublished

This text of 1926 OK CR 59 (Hampton 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

Hampton v. State, 1926 OK CR 59, 243 P. 1118, 33 Okla. Crim. 291, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 74 (Okla. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

BESSEY, P. 'J.

Plaintiff in error was found guilty of the illegal transportation of whisky, with his punishment assessed at confinement in jail for 90 days and to pay a fine of $50. Plaintiff in error is a common laborer, 60 years of age, and recently in ill health. Being unable to earn money by means of manual labor, he sought to replenish his depleted funds by the alluring profits he expected to obtain from the transportation of whisky. He was old enough to know better, but since this is a first offense, and hoping that this prosecution has convinced him that the whisky business is not really attractive, the judgment of the trial court will be modified to a fine of $50 and confinement in jail for a period of 30 days. The judgment, as so modified, is affirmed.

DOYLE and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

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

BESSEY, P. 'J.

Plaintiff in error was found guilty of the illegal transportation of whisky, with his punishment assessed at confinement in jail for 90 days and to pay a fine of $50. Plaintiff in error is a common laborer, 60 years of age, and recently in ill health. Being unable to earn money by means of manual labor, he sought to replenish his depleted funds by the alluring profits he expected to obtain from the transportation of whisky. He was old enough to know better, but since this is a first offense, and hoping that this prosecution has convinced him that the whisky business is not really attractive, the judgment of the trial court will be modified to a fine of $50 and confinement in jail for a period of 30 days. The judgment, as so modified, is affirmed.

DOYLE and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1926 OK CR 59, 243 P. 1118, 33 Okla. Crim. 291, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 74, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hampton-v-state-oklacrimapp-1926.