Richards v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Richards v. State

1920 OK CR 67, 188 P. 692, 17 Okla. Crim. 708, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 63

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 10, 1920

DocketNo. A-3449.

StatusPublished

This text of 1920 OK CR 67 (Richards 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

Richards v. State, 1920 OK CR 67, 188 P. 692, 17 Okla. Crim. 708, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 63 (Okla. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On information charging that they unlawfully conveyed 15 cases of intoxicating liquor from a place in Stephens county, unknown to a place in the public road about a mile southeast of the city of Duncan, the plaintiffs in error, Tom Richards and Rose Sogers, were tried and found guilty, and in accordance with the verdict they were each sentenced to lie confined 180 days in the county jail and to pay a fine, of $500. From the judgment rendered on the verdict they appealed by filing in this court on August 26, 1918, a petition in error with case-made. No brief has been filed and no appearance made for oral argument. The Attorney General has moved tef affirm the judgment, for failure to prosecute the appeal. The evidence tends to show that at the time charged Richards was working in a gambling house, and Rose Rogers was running a sporting house at a .place called “Rag Town,” ail'd there Richards hired the car to haul this whisky, and Rose Rogers paid for the use of .it. They wore apprehended by the officers in the car, and therein were found six *709 sacks of whisky ancl nine sacks of beer. The instructions of the court fully cover the law. After an examination of the record our conclusion is that the appeal in this case is 'wholly destitute of merit. The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM.

On information charging that they unlawfully conveyed 15 cases of intoxicating liquor from a place in Stephens county, unknown to a place in the public road about a mile southeast of the city of Duncan, the plaintiffs in error, Tom Richards and Rose Sogers, were tried and found guilty, and in accordance with the verdict they were each sentenced to lie confined 180 days in the county jail and to pay a fine, of $500. From the judgment rendered on the verdict they appealed by filing in this court on August 26, 1918, a petition in error with case-made. No brief has been filed and no appearance made for oral argument. The Attorney General has moved tef affirm the judgment, for failure to prosecute the appeal. The evidence tends to show that at the time charged Richards was working in a gambling house, and Rose Rogers was running a sporting house at a .place called “Rag Town,” ail'd there Richards hired the car to haul this whisky, and Rose Rogers paid for the use of .it. They wore apprehended by the officers in the car, and therein were found six *709 sacks of whisky ancl nine sacks of beer. The instructions of the court fully cover the law. After an examination of the record our conclusion is that the appeal in this case is 'wholly destitute of merit. The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1920 OK CR 67, 188 P. 692, 17 Okla. Crim. 708, 1920 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-state-oklacrimapp-1920.