Holland v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Holland v. State

1916 OK CR 118, 157 P. 1199, 12 Okla. Crim. 620, 1916 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 125

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 10, 1916

DocketNo. A-2546.

StatusPublished

This text of 1916 OK CR 118 (Holland 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

Holland v. State, 1916 OK CR 118, 157 P. 1199, 12 Okla. Crim. 620, 1916 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 125 (Okla. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Buster Holland, was convicted in the county court of Nowata county upon information charging that in said county on the 30th day of July, 1914, he did sell one quart of whisky to one J. T. Brown, and he was sentenced to pay a fine of fifty dollars' and to be confined in the county jail for thirty days.

Prom the judgment hé appealed by filing in this court on September 27, 1915, a petition in error with case-made. The errors assigned are based upon the instructions given by the court. No authorities are cited in support of said assignments, and we find they are without merit. No material error appearing in the record the judgment is affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Buster Holland, was convicted in the county court of Nowata county upon information charging that in said county on the 30th day of July, 1914, he did sell one quart of whisky to one J. T. Brown, and he was sentenced to pay a fine of fifty dollars' and to be confined in the county jail for thirty days.

Prom the judgment hé appealed by filing in this court on September 27, 1915, a petition in error with case-made. The errors assigned are based upon the instructions given by the court. No authorities are cited in support of said assignments, and we find they are without merit. No material error appearing in the record the judgment is affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1916 OK CR 118, 157 P. 1199, 12 Okla. Crim. 620, 1916 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holland-v-state-oklacrimapp-1916.