James v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

James v. State

1920 OK CR 146, 190 P. 421, 17 Okla. Crim. 733, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 14, 1920

DocketNo. A-3491.

StatusPublished

This text of 1920 OK CR 146 (James 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

James v. State, 1920 OK CR 146, 190 P. 421, 17 Okla. Crim. 733, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120 (Okla. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Pressy James, was convicted at the June. 1918, term of the county court of Oklahoma county on a charge of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor and his punishment fixed at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in 'tile county jail for a period of 60 days. No briefs have been filed on behalf of plaintiff in error and no appearances made for oral argument. The Assistant Attorney General has imposed a motion to affirm the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the appeal lias been abandoned. A careful examination of the record discloses no fundamental error prejudicial to (he substantial rights of the plaintiff in error. It also appears that the appeal is without merit and has been abandoned. The motion of the Attorney General to affirm for failure to prosecute is therefore sustained. The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Pressy James, was convicted at the June. 1918, term of the county court of Oklahoma county on a charge of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor and his punishment fixed at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in 'tile county jail for a period of 60 days. No briefs have been filed on behalf of plaintiff in error and no appearances made for oral argument. The Assistant Attorney General has imposed a motion to affirm the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the appeal lias been abandoned. A careful examination of the record discloses no fundamental error prejudicial to (he substantial rights of the plaintiff in error. It also appears that the appeal is without merit and has been abandoned. The motion of the Attorney General to affirm for failure to prosecute is therefore sustained. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1920 OK CR 146, 190 P. 421, 17 Okla. Crim. 733, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-v-state-oklacrimapp-1920.