Key v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Key v. State

1921 OK CR 147, 210 P. 407, 22 Okla. Crim. 191, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 7

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 30, 1921

DocketNo. A-3639.

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK CR 147 (Key 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

Key v. State, 1921 OK CR 147, 210 P. 407, 22 Okla. Crim. 191, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 7 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Ernest Key, was convicted in the county court of Carter county upon an information charging that he did unlawfully transport and convey from Provence, in Carter county, to near Ardmore, 240 quarts of whisky, along the public highway in said county, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for four months and a fine of $400. From the judgment rendered on the verdict, he appeals.

The errors assigned question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. The evidence for the state shows that Deputy Sheriff Horace Kendall had been informed *192 of a whisky ear coming from Provence, and with Police J. D. Johnston, went to intercept them, and just east of Ard-more, on the Provence road, about 8:30, they met the defendant, Ernest Key, and Emmet Key, in a Cadillac car and stopped them, and found that the car was loaded with about 300 quarts of whisky, stacked in like stovewood. The evidence of these officers was that they had possession of the car and whisky, and arrested the defendant and Emmet Key. They further testified that Emmet Key was driving the car. When the state rested, the defendant moved a1 directed verdict, on the ground that the same was not sufficient to sustain a conviction, which motion was overruled. The evidence in our opinion was sufficient to sustain the verdict.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, Ernest Key, was convicted in the county court of Carter county upon an information charging that he did unlawfully transport and convey from Provence, in Carter county, to near Ardmore, 240 quarts of whisky, along the public highway in said county, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for four months and a fine of $400. From the judgment rendered on the verdict, he appeals.

The errors assigned question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. The evidence for the state shows that Deputy Sheriff Horace Kendall had been informed *192 of a whisky ear coming from Provence, and with Police J. D. Johnston, went to intercept them, and just east of Ard-more, on the Provence road, about 8:30, they met the defendant, Ernest Key, and Emmet Key, in a Cadillac car and stopped them, and found that the car was loaded with about 300 quarts of whisky, stacked in like stovewood. The evidence of these officers was that they had possession of the car and whisky, and arrested the defendant and Emmet Key. They further testified that Emmet Key was driving the car. When the state rested, the defendant moved a1 directed verdict, on the ground that the same was not sufficient to sustain a conviction, which motion was overruled. The evidence in our opinion was sufficient to sustain the verdict.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 147, 210 P. 407, 22 Okla. Crim. 191, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/key-v-state-oklacrimapp-1921.