Isaah v. State

1923 OK CR 206, 216 P. 950, 24 Okla. Crim. 174, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 278
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
DecidedJuly 26, 1923
DocketNo. A-4026.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 1923 OK CR 206 (Isaah 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
Isaah v. State, 1923 OK CR 206, 216 P. 950, 24 Okla. Crim. 174, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 278 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

DOYLE, J.

This appeal is from a judgment of the county court of Pontotoc county, rendered in pursuance of a verdict convicting Lena Isaab of the offense of keeping a disorderly bouse, .and fixing her punishment at confinement for 30 days in the county jail and a fine of $50.

Omitting parts purely formal, tbe information charges that Lena Isaab, did commit "the crime of keeping a disorderly bouse in the manner and form as follows: That is to say, tbe defendant did, in said county and state, at tbe above-named time and place, wilfully and unlawfully keep a disorderly house in! the north part of Ada, Pontotoc county, Okla., contrary,” etc.

Defendant interposed a demurrer on the- ground that tbe information does not state facts sufficient to constitute a public offense, which demurrer was overruled and exception allowed.

While, as a general rule, it is sufficient to charge a statutory offense in the language of the statute, there are exceptions to the rule.

Bishop says:

“The criminal nature and degree of the offense must ‘ap *176 pear in allegation, ’ also tbe particular facts and circumstances which render the defendant guilty of that offense. ’ ’ 1 Bishop’s Crim. Proc. par. 625; Weston v. Territory, 1 Okla. Cr. 407, 98 Pac. 360: Sletcher v. State, 2 Okla. Cr. 300, 101 Pac. 599, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 581; Abrams v. State, 13 Okla. Cr. 11, 161 Pac. 331; Wilcox v. State, 13 Okla. Cr. 599, 167 Pac. 74; Cole v. State, 15 Okla. Cr. 361, 177 Pac. 129.

A house in which people abide and disturb the order and tranquility of the neighborhood is a “disorderly house,” and such facts should be alleged in an information charging the keeping of a disorderly house.

It follows that the court erred in overruling the demurrer to the information. The judgment is accordingly reversed, and the cause remanded, with direction to sustain the demurrer.

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

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

Related

Pratt v. State
1982 OK CR 31 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1982)
Harris v. United States
315 A.2d 569 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1974)
Hemphill v. State
1931 OK CR 527 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1931)
Vaughn v. State
1929 OK CR 147 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1923 OK CR 206, 216 P. 950, 24 Okla. Crim. 174, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/isaah-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.