Leathers v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Leathers v. State

1930 OK CR 380, 291 P. 138, 48 Okla. Crim. 273, 1930 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 29, 1930

DocketNo. A-7503.

StatusPublished

This text of 1930 OK CR 380 (Leathers 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

Leathers v. State, 1930 OK CR 380, 291 P. 138, 48 Okla. Crim. 273, 1930 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120 (Okla. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

CHAPPELL, J.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Kiowa county on a charge of unlawful transportation of whisky, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and confinement for 30 days in the county jail.

The evidence of the state was that the officers saw the defendant and Joe Redman stop their truck near a culvert, about a quarter of a mile from the town of Snyder; that two men got out of the truck and got something from under the culvert; that they followed these men with the truck to Snyder and into a garage; that defendant Leathers got out of the truck and walked to the back of the garage and hid something under a bench; and that on search of the place they found a half pint of whisky. Later the officers went back to the culvert and found a half-gallon jar of whisky under it.

The defendants denied that they knew anything about the whisky under the culvert. The defendant admits that he was near the culvert with Joe Redman, his codefendant, and that they returned in the truck to the garage in Snyder. Defendant admits that he went to the back of the garage, but denies that he took any whisky with him.

Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury. There is a sharp conflict in this evidence. This court has many times held *275 that where there is a conflict in the evidence it will not reverse the case where there is any competent evidence to support the verdict of the jury.

There being sufficient competent evidence in the record to support the verdict of the jury, the cause is affirmed.

EDWARDS, P J., and DAVENPORT, J., concur.

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

CHAPPELL, J.

Plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Kiowa county on a charge of unlawful transportation of whisky, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $50 and confinement for 30 days in the county jail.

The evidence of the state was that the officers saw the defendant and Joe Redman stop their truck near a culvert, about a quarter of a mile from the town of Snyder; that two men got out of the truck and got something from under the culvert; that they followed these men with the truck to Snyder and into a garage; that defendant Leathers got out of the truck and walked to the back of the garage and hid something under a bench; and that on search of the place they found a half pint of whisky. Later the officers went back to the culvert and found a half-gallon jar of whisky under it.

The defendants denied that they knew anything about the whisky under the culvert. The defendant admits that he was near the culvert with Joe Redman, his codefendant, and that they returned in the truck to the garage in Snyder. Defendant admits that he went to the back of the garage, but denies that he took any whisky with him.

Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict of the jury. There is a sharp conflict in this evidence. This court has many times held *275 that where there is a conflict in the evidence it will not reverse the case where there is any competent evidence to support the verdict of the jury.

There being sufficient competent evidence in the record to support the verdict of the jury, the cause is affirmed.

EDWARDS, P J., and DAVENPORT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1930 OK CR 380, 291 P. 138, 48 Okla. Crim. 273, 1930 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leathers-v-state-oklacrimapp-1930.