Porter v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Porter v. State

1919 OK CR 43, 177 P. 380, 15 Okla. Crim. 676, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 18

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma·Decided February 15, 1919·No. No. A-2844.·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, J. P. Porter, was convicted of a charge that he did keep a place 1% miles north of the town of Orr, Love county, with the intent and purpose Af selling intoxicating liquors, and his punishment was fixed at one year in the penitentiary. To reverse the judgment rendered on the verdict, an appeal was perfected. •

This is a pr^ecution u>l r section 4, < 26, Session Laws 1913, which provision of the state was, in the case of Proctor v. State, 15 Okla. Cr. 338, 176 Pac. 771, held unconstitutional and void. For the reasons stated in the opinion in the Proctor Case, the judgment is reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, J. P. Porter, was convicted of a charge that he did keep a place 1% miles north of the town of Orr, Love county, with the intent and purpose Af selling intoxicating liquors, and his punishment was fixed at one year in the penitentiary. To reverse the judgment rendered on the verdict, an appeal was perfected. •

This is a pr^ecution u>l r section 4, < 26, Session Laws 1913, which provision of the state was, in the case of Proctor v. State, 15 Okla. Cr. 338, 176 Pac. 771, held unconstitutional and void. For the reasons stated in the opinion in the Proctor Case, the judgment is reversed.

Porter v. State, 1919 OK CR 43, 177 P. 380, 15 Okla. Crim. 676, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 18 (Okla. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

1919 OK CR 43 (Porter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related