McGraw v. State

1912 OK CR 129, 122 P. 242, 7 Okla. Crim. 105, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 80
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided March 27, 1912·No. No. A-1015.·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

FURMAN, P. J.

While it is true that a defendant in a criminal case has the right under the Constitution and statutes -of this state to have the rulings, orders, and judgment of the trial court reviewed upon appeal to this court,' yet this right, like any other, may be waived by the voluntary act of such defendant. Where a defendant, pending the determination of his appeal to this court, voluntarily withdraws himself beyond the jurisdiction of the court or becomes a fugitive from justice and ■places himself beyond the reach of the process of the court, so as to defeat the enforcement of any judgment which might be rendered against him, he thereby waives and abandons his right •of appeal, and the appeal will be dismissed. See Tyler v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 179, 104 Pac. 919, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 921; Tanner v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 298, 114 Pac. 360; Morey v. State, 6 Okla. Cr. 166, 117 Pac. 724; Havill v. State, infra, 121 Pac. 794; Tydings v. State, 4 Okla. Cr. 659, 112 Pac. 759.

*106 It has been made to appear to the satisfaction of this court that the appellant M. C. McGraw, alias Mike O’Brien, is a fugitive from-justice. It is therefore ordered by the court that the appeal in this cause be dismissed.

ARMSTRONG and DOYLE, JJ., concur.

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

McGraw v. State, 1912 OK CR 129, 122 P. 242, 7 Okla. Crim. 105, 1912 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 80 (Okla. Ct. App. 1912).

1912 OK CR 129 (McGraw v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Spradling v. Spradling
1919 OK 23 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1919)
Alexander v. Kingfisher
1915 OK CR 229 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1915)
Belcher v. State
1913 OK CR 73 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1913)