Lofton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Lofton v. State

1925 OK CR 449, 239 P. 1119, 31 Okla. Crim. 364, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 442

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 26, 1925

DocketNo. A-4465.

StatusPublished

This text of 1925 OK CR 449 (Lofton 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

Lofton v. State, 1925 OK CR 449, 239 P. 1119, 31 Okla. Crim. 364, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 442 (Okla. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Vernie Lofton, plaintiff in error, was convicted in the county court of Greer county of the offense of illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor, with his punishment fixed by the jury at confinement in the county j>ail for a period of 60 days and to pay a fine *365 of $100. From the judgment on the verdict, he appeals. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, because it was not lodged in this court within 120 days from the date of judgment, as provided by law, and that no order of court was made extending the time beyond that period. An examination of the record shows that the motion to dismiss is well taken. The appeal is therefore dismissed, and the trial court is directed to execute the judgment rendered therein.

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

PER CURIAM.

Vernie Lofton, plaintiff in error, was convicted in the county court of Greer county of the offense of illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor, with his punishment fixed by the jury at confinement in the county j>ail for a period of 60 days and to pay a fine *365 of $100. From the judgment on the verdict, he appeals. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, because it was not lodged in this court within 120 days from the date of judgment, as provided by law, and that no order of court was made extending the time beyond that period. An examination of the record shows that the motion to dismiss is well taken. The appeal is therefore dismissed, and the trial court is directed to execute the judgment rendered therein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1925 OK CR 449, 239 P. 1119, 31 Okla. Crim. 364, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lofton-v-state-oklacrimapp-1925.