Hinds v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hinds v. State

148 P. 1147, 11 Okla. Crim. 721

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 1, 1900

DocketNo. A-2223.

StatusPublished

This text of 148 P. 1147 (Hinds 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

Hinds v. State, 148 P. 1147, 11 Okla. Crim. 721 (Okla. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CUEIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Leo Hinds, was convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Washita county on a charge of unlawfully conveying intoxicating liquor from one place in said county to another place therein, and his punishment fixed at a fine of fifty dollars and imprisonment in the county jail for a period of thirty days.

Upon a careful consideration of the entire record in this ease we are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed.

The judgment of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed.

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

PEE CUEIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Leo Hinds, was convicted at the January, 1913, term of the county court of Washita county on a charge of unlawfully conveying intoxicating liquor from one place in said county to another place therein, and his punishment fixed at a fine of fifty dollars and imprisonment in the county jail for a period of thirty days.

Upon a careful consideration of the entire record in this ease we are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed.

The judgment of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 P. 1147, 11 Okla. Crim. 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinds-v-state-oklacrimapp-1900.