Middleton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Middleton v. State

1922 OK CR 178, 210 P. 1119, 22 Okla. Crim. 281, 1922 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 42

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 16, 1922

DocketNo. A-3927.

StatusPublished

This text of 1922 OK CR 178 (Middleton 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

Middleton v. State, 1922 OK CR 178, 210 P. 1119, 22 Okla. Crim. 281, 1922 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 42 (Okla. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Harry W. Middleton was convicted of the crime of embezzlement in the district court of Le Flore county, and his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of one year. This appeal has been pending in, this court since the 3d day of March, 1921. The cause was submitted on March 14, 1922, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in error, but he was allowed 30 days within which to file a brief herein. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error. Rule 9 of this court (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) provides:

“When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.”

An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Harry W. Middleton was convicted of the crime of embezzlement in the district court of Le Flore county, and his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term of one year. This appeal has been pending in, this court since the 3d day of March, 1921. The cause was submitted on March 14, 1922, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in error, but he was allowed 30 days within which to file a brief herein. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error. Rule 9 of this court (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) provides:

“When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadings, the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.”

An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1922 OK CR 178, 210 P. 1119, 22 Okla. Crim. 281, 1922 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/middleton-v-state-oklacrimapp-1922.