Krivanek v. State

1914 OK CR 140, 144 P. 188, 11 Okla. Crim. 172, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 34
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
DecidedNovember 21, 1914
DocketNo. A-2345.
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 1914 OK CR 140 (Krivanek 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
Krivanek v. State, 1914 OK CR 140, 144 P. 188, 11 Okla. Crim. 172, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 34 (Okla. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

ARMSTRONG, J.

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment of conviction entered on the 4th day of April, *173 1914, wherein the defendant was sentenced in accordance with the verdict of the jury to pay a fine of $150, and to be confined in the county jail for 40 days. An appeal was attempted to be taken by filing in this court on October 3, 1914, a petition in error with case-made. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the same was not taken until long after the expiration of the time allowed by law within which to perfect an appeal in a misdemeanor case.

Our Procedure Criminal provides that:'

“In misdemeanor cases the appeal must be taken within sixty days after the judgment is rendered: Provided, however, that the trial court or judge may, for good cause shown, extend the time in which such appeal may be taken not exceeding sixty days.” (Section 5991, Rev. Taws 1910.)

This court has repeatedly held that the appeal must be perfected within the time prescribed by the statute, and that this court does not acquire jurisdiction unless the appeal is taken within the statutory time. High v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 183, 131 Pac. 189; Welch v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 33, 130 Pac. 514; Houser v. State, 8 Okla. Cr. 292, 127 Pac. 706; Eaton v. State, 7 Okla. Cr. 48, 121 Pac. 1089.

In this case 181 days had elapsed after the judgment was entered before the petition in error was filed in this court. As the court failed to acquire jurisdiction, the motion to dismiss must be sustained. The purported appeal is therefore dismissed, and the cause remanded to the trial court.

DOYTE and FURMAN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Steele v. State
1923 OK CR 320 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1923)
Carroll v. State
1923 OK CR 248 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1923)
Allen v. State
1923 OK CR 249 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1923)
Reed v. State
1922 OK CR 118 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1922)
Danna v. State
1919 OK CR 171 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1919)
Gunter v. State
1917 OK CR 19 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1914 OK CR 140, 144 P. 188, 11 Okla. Crim. 172, 1914 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 34, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krivanek-v-state-oklacrimapp-1914.