Pursley v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Pursley v. State

1921 OK CR 142, 199 P. 1118, 19 Okla. Crim. 301, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 70

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 30, 1921

DocketNo. A-3697.

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK CR 142 (Pursley 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

Pursley v. State, 1921 OK CR 142, 199 P. 1118, 19 Okla. Crim. 301, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 70 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, James Pursley, was convicted on a charge that he did have in his possession three quarts of whisky with the unlawful intent to sell the same, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for 30 days and a fine of $50. From the judgment rendered on the verdict he appeals. The proof on the part of the state is undisputed. It shows that the defendant had six pints and one half pint of whisky in the pockets of his clothes.

No brief has been filed, and when the case was called for final submission, no appearance was made in behalf of plaintiff in error. Whereupon the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal. An examination of the record discloses that the appeal is destitute of merit. It follows the judgment should be and is hereby affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, James Pursley, was convicted on a charge that he did have in his possession three quarts of whisky with the unlawful intent to sell the same, and his punishment fixed at confinement in the county jail for 30 days and a fine of $50. From the judgment rendered on the verdict he appeals. The proof on the part of the state is undisputed. It shows that the defendant had six pints and one half pint of whisky in the pockets of his clothes.

No brief has been filed, and when the case was called for final submission, no appearance was made in behalf of plaintiff in error. Whereupon the Attorney General moved to affirm the judgment for failure to prosecute the appeal. An examination of the record discloses that the appeal is destitute of merit. It follows the judgment should be and is hereby affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 142, 199 P. 1118, 19 Okla. Crim. 301, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 70, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pursley-v-state-oklacrimapp-1921.