Johnston v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Johnston v. State

1911 OK CR 457, 118 P. 1110, 6 Okla. Crim. 654, 1911 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 485

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedOctober 31, 1911

DocketNos. A-703, A-725, A-726.

StatusPublished

This text of 1911 OK CR 457 (Johnston 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

Johnston v. State, 1911 OK CR 457, 118 P. 1110, 6 Okla. Crim. 654, 1911 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 485 (Okla. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

*655 DOYLE, J.

Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted of the crime of having possession of intoxicating liquors, with the intention of violating the provisions of the prohibition law in each of three cases. In case No. A-703, he was on February 2, 1910, sentenced to be confined for thirty days in the county jail and pay a fine of one hundred and fifty dollars. From which judgment he appealed by filing in this court on April 1, 1910, petition in error with ease-made. In case No. A-726 he was, on February 17, 1910, sentenced to be confined in the county jail for ninety days and pay a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 16, a petition in error with case-made. In case No. A-725, he was, on March 9, 1910, sentenced to be confined in the county jail for thirty days and pay a fine of two hundred dollars. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 16, petition in error with ease-made. The assignments of error are similar in each ease. It is insisted that the court erred in refusing to grant a change of judge in each case. The record shows the filing of the statutory affidavits for a change of judge conformable to sec. 1984 Snyder’s Stat. This section was repealed by sec. 2012 Snyder’s Stat. The application for change of judge was properly overruled in each case. We have carefully examined the record in each ease. The evidence is conclusive as to the guilt of the defendant. The assignments of error are without merit. We are clearly of opinion that plaintiff in error had a fair and impartial trial in each case. Wherefore the judgment of the county court of Coal county in each of the foregoing causes is hereby affirmed and the same are remanded with directions to said county court to enforce its judgments therein.

FURMAN, P. J., and ARMSTRONG, J., concur.

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

*655 DOYLE, J.

Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted of the crime of having possession of intoxicating liquors, with the intention of violating the provisions of the prohibition law in each of three cases. In case No. A-703, he was on February 2, 1910, sentenced to be confined for thirty days in the county jail and pay a fine of one hundred and fifty dollars. From which judgment he appealed by filing in this court on April 1, 1910, petition in error with ease-made. In case No. A-726 he was, on February 17, 1910, sentenced to be confined in the county jail for ninety days and pay a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 16, a petition in error with case-made. In case No. A-725, he was, on March 9, 1910, sentenced to be confined in the county jail for thirty days and pay a fine of two hundred dollars. An appeal was taken by filing in this court on April 16, petition in error with ease-made. The assignments of error are similar in each ease. It is insisted that the court erred in refusing to grant a change of judge in each case. The record shows the filing of the statutory affidavits for a change of judge conformable to sec. 1984 Snyder’s Stat. This section was repealed by sec. 2012 Snyder’s Stat. The application for change of judge was properly overruled in each case. We have carefully examined the record in each ease. The evidence is conclusive as to the guilt of the defendant. The assignments of error are without merit. We are clearly of opinion that plaintiff in error had a fair and impartial trial in each case. Wherefore the judgment of the county court of Coal county in each of the foregoing causes is hereby affirmed and the same are remanded with directions to said county court to enforce its judgments therein.

FURMAN, P. J., and ARMSTRONG, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1911 OK CR 457, 118 P. 1110, 6 Okla. Crim. 654, 1911 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnston-v-state-oklacrimapp-1911.