Keeter v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Keeter v. State

1920 OK CR 10, 186 P. 245, 17 Okla. Crim. 697, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 19, 1920

DocketNo. A-3382.

StatusPublished

This text of 1920 OK CR 10 (Keeter 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

Keeter v. State, 1920 OK CR 10, 186 P. 245, 17 Okla. Crim. 697, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17 (Okla. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

DIOR CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Lester Keeter, was convicted on ¡i charge that lie did in Cotton county sell to George Davis one pint of whisky on the 5th day of February, 1918, and in accordance with tlu> verdict of the jury lie was sentenced to be confined in the county jail for 60 days and pay a fine of $50. From the judgment an appeal was perfected by filing in this court on June. 5, 1918, a petition in error with case-made. No brief lias been filed, and when the ease was called for final submission the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute t]he appeal.

For the reasons stated, the motion is sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is «ffirmed. Mandate forthwith.

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

DIOR CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Lester Keeter, was convicted on ¡i charge that lie did in Cotton county sell to George Davis one pint of whisky on the 5th day of February, 1918, and in accordance with tlu> verdict of the jury lie was sentenced to be confined in the county jail for 60 days and pay a fine of $50. From the judgment an appeal was perfected by filing in this court on June. 5, 1918, a petition in error with case-made. No brief lias been filed, and when the ease was called for final submission the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute t]he appeal.

For the reasons stated, the motion is sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is «ffirmed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1920 OK CR 10, 186 P. 245, 17 Okla. Crim. 697, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keeter-v-state-oklacrimapp-1920.