McIntyre v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

McIntyre v. State

1913 OK CR 210, 132 P. 1195, 9 Okla. Crim. 727, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 222

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 4, 1913

DocketNo. A-1590.

StatusPublished

This text of 1913 OK CR 210 (McIntyre 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

McIntyre v. State, 1913 OK CR 210, 132 P. 1195, 9 Okla. Crim. 727, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 222 (Okla. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

■PER .CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was ¡informed against and convicted of having in his possession intoxicating liquors with the intention of selling the same in violation of the prohibition law.

Upon his trial the jury found him guilty, and assessed his punishment at confinement in the county jail' for thirty days, and that he pay a fine of fifty dollars.

No brief has been filed, nor oral argument made on behalf of the defendant. The Attorney General has filed a motion to affirm for failure to prosecute the appeal. From an examination of the record, our conclusion is that this appeal was taken purely for delay, as there is not the semblance! of merit in the errors assigned. The judgment of the county court of Pittsburg county is therefore affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

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

■PER .CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was ¡informed against and convicted of having in his possession intoxicating liquors with the intention of selling the same in violation of the prohibition law.

Upon his trial the jury found him guilty, and assessed his punishment at confinement in the county jail' for thirty days, and that he pay a fine of fifty dollars.

No brief has been filed, nor oral argument made on behalf of the defendant. The Attorney General has filed a motion to affirm for failure to prosecute the appeal. From an examination of the record, our conclusion is that this appeal was taken purely for delay, as there is not the semblance! of merit in the errors assigned. The judgment of the county court of Pittsburg county is therefore affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1913 OK CR 210, 132 P. 1195, 9 Okla. Crim. 727, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcintyre-v-state-oklacrimapp-1913.