Preston v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Preston v. State

1928 OK CR 266, 269 P. 507, 40 Okla. Crim. 403, 1928 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 214

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 4, 1928

DocketNo. A-6100.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1928 OK CR 266 (Preston 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

Preston v. State, 1928 OK CR 266, 269 P. 507, 40 Okla. Crim. 403, 1928 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 214 (Okla. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, who for brevity will be referred to as defendant, was convicted in the county court of Jackson county on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $150 and to serve 50 days in the county jail.

The appeal seeks to raise the question that the conviction was procured by evidence obtained by an illegal search warrant. An examination of the record discloses that the certificate of the trial judge is not attested by the clerk, as required by the provisions of section 785, Comp. St. 1921. This court has .several times held that this provision of the law is mandatory, and unless the case-made is attested by the clerk it is not properly before this court. Lewis v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 448, 106 P. 647; Humphrey v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 504, 106 P. 978, 139 Am. St. Rep. 972. The record contains a certificate of the clerk and the case-made is sufficient as a transcript. Butler v. *404 State, 22 Okla. Cr. 241, 223 P. 193; Tracy v. State, 24 Okla. Cr. 144, 216 P. 941.

An appeal by transcript raises only those questions appearing on the face of the record proper. The testimony is not before the court. Section 2777, Comp. St. 1921; Jenkins v. State, 11 Okla. Cr. 168, 145 P. 500. Considered as a transcript, no material error is made to appear.

The case is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, who for brevity will be referred to as defendant, was convicted in the county court of Jackson county on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $150 and to serve 50 days in the county jail.

The appeal seeks to raise the question that the conviction was procured by evidence obtained by an illegal search warrant. An examination of the record discloses that the certificate of the trial judge is not attested by the clerk, as required by the provisions of section 785, Comp. St. 1921. This court has .several times held that this provision of the law is mandatory, and unless the case-made is attested by the clerk it is not properly before this court. Lewis v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 448, 106 P. 647; Humphrey v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 504, 106 P. 978, 139 Am. St. Rep. 972. The record contains a certificate of the clerk and the case-made is sufficient as a transcript. Butler v. *404 State, 22 Okla. Cr. 241, 223 P. 193; Tracy v. State, 24 Okla. Cr. 144, 216 P. 941.

An appeal by transcript raises only those questions appearing on the face of the record proper. The testimony is not before the court. Section 2777, Comp. St. 1921; Jenkins v. State, 11 Okla. Cr. 168, 145 P. 500. Considered as a transcript, no material error is made to appear.

The case is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1928 OK CR 266, 269 P. 507, 40 Okla. Crim. 403, 1928 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/preston-v-state-oklacrimapp-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack