Killion v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Killion v. State

1923 OK CR 349, 221 P. 112, 25 Okla. Crim. 421, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 86

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 22, 1923

DocketNo. A-4416.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 349 (Killion 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

Killion v. State, 1923 OK CR 349, 221 P. 112, 25 Okla. Crim. 421, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 86 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Butch Killion, was convicted in the county court of Kay county of the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and confinement in the county jail for a period of 30 days. The appeal was lodged in this court on July 21, 1922.

The cause was finally submitted on November 8, 1923. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and *422 no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time of its submission. Under rule 9 of this court this appeal may therefore be considered as abandoned.

However, we have examined the record, and find there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict and that the accused in other respects was accorded a fair trial.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Butch Killion, was convicted in the county court of Kay county of the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and confinement in the county jail for a period of 30 days. The appeal was lodged in this court on July 21, 1922.

The cause was finally submitted on November 8, 1923. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and *422 no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time of its submission. Under rule 9 of this court this appeal may therefore be considered as abandoned.

However, we have examined the record, and find there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict and that the accused in other respects was accorded a fair trial.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 349, 221 P. 112, 25 Okla. Crim. 421, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 86, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/killion-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.