Hopper v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hopper v. State

1966 OK CR 132, 418 P.2d 362, 1966 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 309

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 21, 1966

DocketNo. A-13998

StatusPublished

This text of 1966 OK CR 132 (Hopper 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

Hopper v. State, 1966 OK CR 132, 418 P.2d 362, 1966 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 309 (Okla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

Ronald Dean Hopper, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was convicted in the District Court of Kay County for the crime of Rape in the First Degree, sentenced to serve a term of Fifty (SO) years imprisonment in the State Penitentiary, and appeals.

We have carefully examined the record and find that the defendant was ably represented by competent counsel, the proof of guilt overwhelmingly supports the verdict of the jury, the court carefully and meticulously instructed the jury, and the punishment imposed was well within the range provided by law; under such circumstances the Court of Criminal Appeals will not reverse or modify the judgment and sentence appealed from.

Judgment and sentence is accordingly affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ, concur.

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

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge.

Ronald Dean Hopper, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was convicted in the District Court of Kay County for the crime of Rape in the First Degree, sentenced to serve a term of Fifty (SO) years imprisonment in the State Penitentiary, and appeals.

We have carefully examined the record and find that the defendant was ably represented by competent counsel, the proof of guilt overwhelmingly supports the verdict of the jury, the court carefully and meticulously instructed the jury, and the punishment imposed was well within the range provided by law; under such circumstances the Court of Criminal Appeals will not reverse or modify the judgment and sentence appealed from.

Judgment and sentence is accordingly affirmed.

NIX and BRETT, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1966 OK CR 132, 418 P.2d 362, 1966 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hopper-v-state-oklacrimapp-1966.