Hughes v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Hughes v. State

1919 OK CR 257, 183 P. 431, 16 Okla. Crim. 702, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 233

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 26, 1919

DocketNo. A-3284.

StatusPublished

This text of 1919 OK CR 257 (Hughes 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

Hughes v. State, 1919 OK CR 257, 183 P. 431, 16 Okla. Crim. 702, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 233 (Okla. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CURIAM.

Dade Hughes was convicted in the superior court of Creek county of the crime of unlawful possession of liquor, and his punishment fixed as above stated.

This appeal lias been pending in this -court since the 12th day of March, 1918, the cause having been submitted June 5, 1919, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in *703 error, nor has any brief been filed in bis behalf. Bole 9 (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 105 Pac. x) of this court provides :

“When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto1, and the judgment and ¡sentence, and if no prejudicial error appeal's, will affirm the judgment.”

This appeal has evidently been abandoned. An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and in accordance with rule 9, supra, the judgment is affirmed.

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

PEE CURIAM.

Dade Hughes was convicted in the superior court of Creek county of the crime of unlawful possession of liquor, and his punishment fixed as above stated.

This appeal lias been pending in this -court since the 12th day of March, 1918, the cause having been submitted June 5, 1919, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in *703 error, nor has any brief been filed in bis behalf. Bole 9 (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 105 Pac. x) of this court provides :

“When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto1, and the judgment and ¡sentence, and if no prejudicial error appeal's, will affirm the judgment.”

This appeal has evidently been abandoned. An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and in accordance with rule 9, supra, the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1919 OK CR 257, 183 P. 431, 16 Okla. Crim. 702, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-state-oklacrimapp-1919.