McKellop v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

McKellop v. State

1921 OK CR 11, 194 P. 457, 18 Okla. Crim. 326, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 15, 1921

DocketA-3627

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1921 OK CR 11 (McKellop 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

McKellop v. State, 1921 OK CR 11, 194 P. 457, 18 Okla. Crim. 326, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

DOYLE, P. J.

Plaintiff in error, Tom McKellop, and Homer Gray, were by information filed in the superior court of Okfuskee county jointly charged with the murder of one Robert Lyles, alleged to have been committed in said county on or about the 29th day of December, 1918. A severance was granted, and upon his separate trial the jury rendered their verdict finding the defendant Tom McKellop guilty of murder as charged in the information and assessing his punishment at imprisonment for life at hard labor. From the judgment rendered in accordance with the verdict on the 19th day of March, 1919, *327 an appeal was perfected by filing in this court on. September 13, 1919, a petition in error with case-made.

The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that plaintiff in error on November 5, 1920, escaped from the penitentiary and is now at large as a fugitive, which motion is supported by the affidavit of A. R. Garrett, deputy warden of the state penitentiary.

The uniform holding of this court is that where a defendant has been convicted and sentenced and perfects an appeal, this court will not consider his appeal, unless defendant is where he can be made to respond to any judgment or order which may be rendered and entered in the case; and where the defendant makes his escape from the custody of the law and becomes a fugitive from justice pending the determination of his appeal, this court will on proper motion dismiss the appeal. Young v. State, 16 Okla. Cr. 116, 180 Pac. 872.

The motion to- dismiss was filed December 9, 1920, and no response or answer thereto has been filed. Upon the uncontroverted facts the plaintiff in error has waived his right to have his appeal in this court considered and determined. The appeal is therefore dismissed, and the cause remanded to the superior court of Okfuskee county.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur.

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

DOYLE, P. J.

Plaintiff in error, Tom McKellop, and Homer Gray, were by information filed in the superior court of Okfuskee county jointly charged with the murder of one Robert Lyles, alleged to have been committed in said county on or about the 29th day of December, 1918. A severance was granted, and upon his separate trial the jury rendered their verdict finding the defendant Tom McKellop guilty of murder as charged in the information and assessing his punishment at imprisonment for life at hard labor. From the judgment rendered in accordance with the verdict on the 19th day of March, 1919, *327 an appeal was perfected by filing in this court on. September 13, 1919, a petition in error with case-made.

The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that plaintiff in error on November 5, 1920, escaped from the penitentiary and is now at large as a fugitive, which motion is supported by the affidavit of A. R. Garrett, deputy warden of the state penitentiary.

The uniform holding of this court is that where a defendant has been convicted and sentenced and perfects an appeal, this court will not consider his appeal, unless defendant is where he can be made to respond to any judgment or order which may be rendered and entered in the case; and where the defendant makes his escape from the custody of the law and becomes a fugitive from justice pending the determination of his appeal, this court will on proper motion dismiss the appeal. Young v. State, 16 Okla. Cr. 116, 180 Pac. 872.

The motion to- dismiss was filed December 9, 1920, and no response or answer thereto has been filed. Upon the uncontroverted facts the plaintiff in error has waived his right to have his appeal in this court considered and determined. The appeal is therefore dismissed, and the cause remanded to the superior court of Okfuskee county.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 11, 194 P. 457, 18 Okla. Crim. 326, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckellop-v-state-oklacrimapp-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack