Shelton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Shelton v. State

1926 OK CR 393, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 338, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 397

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 23, 1926

DocketNo. A-5817.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1926 OK CR 393 (Shelton 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

Shelton v. State, 1926 OK CR 393, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 338, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 397 (Okla. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Ben Shelton, was convicted on a charge that in Bryan county, February 11, 1926, he did make and manufacture, by means and use of a certain apparatus commonly known as a whisky still, certain spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit, one-half pint of moonshine whisky, and. in accordance wth the verdict of the jury was sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and to be confined in the county *339 jail for 60 days. He has appealed from the judgment, but no brief has been filed, and no appearance made on his behalf in this court. After a careful examination of the record in this case, both as to the law and the evidence, we have failed to discover anything whereof the defendant has just right to complain. The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Ben Shelton, was convicted on a charge that in Bryan county, February 11, 1926, he did make and manufacture, by means and use of a certain apparatus commonly known as a whisky still, certain spirituous and intoxicating liquor, to wit, one-half pint of moonshine whisky, and. in accordance wth the verdict of the jury was sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and to be confined in the county *339 jail for 60 days. He has appealed from the judgment, but no brief has been filed, and no appearance made on his behalf in this court. After a careful examination of the record in this case, both as to the law and the evidence, we have failed to discover anything whereof the defendant has just right to complain. The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1926 OK CR 393, 250 P. 1118, 35 Okla. Crim. 338, 1926 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelton-v-state-oklacrimapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack