Hays v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hays v. State

1923 OK CR 171, 215 P. 960, 24 Okla. Crim. 70, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 244

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 23, 1923

DocketNo. A-4310.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 171 (Hays 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

Hays v. State, 1923 OK CR 171, 215 P. 960, 24 Okla. Crim. 70, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 244 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Jess Hays, was tried and convicted on an information filed in the county court of Pontotoc county, charging that on the 27th day of November, 1920, he committed the offense of having unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, with intent to sell, barter, give away, .and otherwise dispose of the same, in violation of the prohibitory laws of the state. By a verdict of a jury he was found guilty as charged on January 2, 1922, and his punishment was fixed at 60 days in jail and a fine of $250.

*71 The plaintiff in error has filed no brief, and no appearance has been made in behalf of plaintiff in error in this case at or subsequent to its submission. We may therefore assume that he has abandoned his appeal. When the case was called for final submission, the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal.

This motion is sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Jess Hays, was tried and convicted on an information filed in the county court of Pontotoc county, charging that on the 27th day of November, 1920, he committed the offense of having unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, with intent to sell, barter, give away, .and otherwise dispose of the same, in violation of the prohibitory laws of the state. By a verdict of a jury he was found guilty as charged on January 2, 1922, and his punishment was fixed at 60 days in jail and a fine of $250.

*71 The plaintiff in error has filed no brief, and no appearance has been made in behalf of plaintiff in error in this case at or subsequent to its submission. We may therefore assume that he has abandoned his appeal. When the case was called for final submission, the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal.

This motion is sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 171, 215 P. 960, 24 Okla. Crim. 70, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hays-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.