Roy v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Roy v. State

1919 OK CR 249, 183 P. 428, 16 Okla. Crim. 700, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 228

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedAugust 19, 1919

DocketNo. A-3285.

StatusPublished

This text of 1919 OK CR 249 (Roy 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

Roy v. State, 1919 OK CR 249, 183 P. 428, 16 Okla. Crim. 700, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 228 (Okla. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dorothy Roy was convicted in the superior court of Creek county of keeping a bawdyhouse, and her punishment fixed as above stated.

This appeal has been pending in this court since the 12th day of March, 1918, the cause having been submitted Juno 5, 1919, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in error, nor has any brief been filed in her behalf. Rulé 9 (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) of this court 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.”

This appeal has evidently been abandoned. An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and, in accordance with Rule 9, supra, the judgment is affirmed..

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

PER CURIAM.

Dorothy Roy was convicted in the superior court of Creek county of keeping a bawdyhouse, and her punishment fixed as above stated.

This appeal has been pending in this court since the 12th day of March, 1918, the cause having been submitted Juno 5, 1919, at which time no appearance was made by any counsel representing plaintiff in error, nor has any brief been filed in her behalf. Rulé 9 (12 Okla. Cr. viii, 165 Pac. x) of this court 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.”

This appeal has evidently been abandoned. An examination of the pleadings, instructions, and judgment and sentence discloses no prejudicial error, and, in accordance with Rule 9, supra, the judgment is affirmed..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1919 OK CR 249, 183 P. 428, 16 Okla. Crim. 700, 1919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roy-v-state-oklacrimapp-1919.