Hicks v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hicks v. State

1923 OK CR 153, 215 P. 794, 24 Okla. Crim. 43, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 237

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 14, 1923

DocketNos. A-4657, A-4644.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1923 OK CR 153 (Hicks 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

Hicks v. State, 1923 OK CR 153, 215 P. 794, 24 Okla. Crim. 43, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 237 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

DOYLE, J.

In the information in this case Pearl Hicks was charged with obtaining from- one Geo. A. Feland a promissory note for $200, executed by said Pearl Hicks and one A. L. Hicks, by giving said Feland a check in payment of said note. Upon his trial the jury found him guilty and assessed his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentitary for the term of four years. On October 18, 1922, the court rendered judgment on the verdict. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 17, 1923, a' petition in error with case-made.

In the information in the other case Pearl Hicks was charged with removing three mares from Beckham county with intent to defraud one Geo. A. Feland, mortgagee and holder of a chattel mortgage executed on said personal property, executed by Pearl Hicks in favor of the said Geo. A. Feland. Upon his trial he was found guilty, but the jury failed to agree as to his punishment. On October 25,1922, the court rendered judgment on the verdict and sentenced the defendant to imprison *44 ment in the penitentiary for the term of one year. From the judgment an appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 23, 1923, a petition in error with case-made.

Pending the determination of said appeals, counsel of record for plaintiff in error filed motions to dismiss these appeals, for the reason that on the 11th day of June, 1923, paroles were granted the plaintiff in error in each of the above entitled and numbered causes by the Governor, and the same were accepted by plaintiff in error.

Where a plaintiff in error accepts a parole pending the determination of his appeal, he thereby waives the right to have his appeal determined, and when notice of this fact is brought to the attention of this court, the appeal will be dismissed. It is therefore adjudged and ordered that the appeals of plaintiff in error, Pearl Hicks, in these two cases be and the same are hereby dismissed, and the causes remanded to the district court of Beckham county.

MATSON, P. J., and BESSEY, J., concur.

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

DOYLE, J.

In the information in this case Pearl Hicks was charged with obtaining from- one Geo. A. Feland a promissory note for $200, executed by said Pearl Hicks and one A. L. Hicks, by giving said Feland a check in payment of said note. Upon his trial the jury found him guilty and assessed his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentitary for the term of four years. On October 18, 1922, the court rendered judgment on the verdict. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 17, 1923, a' petition in error with case-made.

In the information in the other case Pearl Hicks was charged with removing three mares from Beckham county with intent to defraud one Geo. A. Feland, mortgagee and holder of a chattel mortgage executed on said personal property, executed by Pearl Hicks in favor of the said Geo. A. Feland. Upon his trial he was found guilty, but the jury failed to agree as to his punishment. On October 25,1922, the court rendered judgment on the verdict and sentenced the defendant to imprison *44 ment in the penitentiary for the term of one year. From the judgment an appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 23, 1923, a petition in error with case-made.

Pending the determination of said appeals, counsel of record for plaintiff in error filed motions to dismiss these appeals, for the reason that on the 11th day of June, 1923, paroles were granted the plaintiff in error in each of the above entitled and numbered causes by the Governor, and the same were accepted by plaintiff in error.

Where a plaintiff in error accepts a parole pending the determination of his appeal, he thereby waives the right to have his appeal determined, and when notice of this fact is brought to the attention of this court, the appeal will be dismissed. It is therefore adjudged and ordered that the appeals of plaintiff in error, Pearl Hicks, in these two cases be and the same are hereby dismissed, and the causes remanded to the district court of Beckham county.

MATSON, P. J., and BESSEY, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 153, 215 P. 794, 24 Okla. Crim. 43, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack