Shoemake v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Shoemake v. State

1915 OK CR 273, 165 P. 632, 14 Okla. Crim. 678, 1915 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 1

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedOctober 30, 1915

DocketNo. A-2360.

StatusPublished

This text of 1915 OK CR 273 (Shoemake 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

Shoemake v. State, 1915 OK CR 273, 165 P. 632, 14 Okla. Crim. 678, 1915 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 1 (Okla. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted on an informa-t tion charging the unlawful conveyance of 24 quarts of whisky from a point unknown in Muskogee county to a point about 30 feet northeast of the Midland Valley depot in the town of Porum. September 23, 1914, the court rendered judgment and sentenced him to be confined in the county jail for 30 days and to pay a fine of $50 and the 'costs. The evidence for the state tends to show that plaintiff in error left a train arriving at Porum from Ft. Smith with two grips containing whisky, and, when arrested, said “he had gotten the liquor for sick folks.” As a witness in his own behalf, the defendant testified that when he got off the train he did not have any grips; that after walking eight or ten steps Deputy Sheriff McClelland “hollered” at him and said. “I will take those grips and you, too, to Muskogee,” and witness answered, “What grips?” that he looked and saw two grips on the ground eight or ten steps from -him.

Upon a careful examination of the record in this case, we are satisfied tha none of the alleged errors are well taken. It was for the jury to determine to what extent they would give credit to the defendant’s testimony.

Finding no errors prejudicial to the defendant, the judgment will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted on an informa-t tion charging the unlawful conveyance of 24 quarts of whisky from a point unknown in Muskogee county to a point about 30 feet northeast of the Midland Valley depot in the town of Porum. September 23, 1914, the court rendered judgment and sentenced him to be confined in the county jail for 30 days and to pay a fine of $50 and the 'costs. The evidence for the state tends to show that plaintiff in error left a train arriving at Porum from Ft. Smith with two grips containing whisky, and, when arrested, said “he had gotten the liquor for sick folks.” As a witness in his own behalf, the defendant testified that when he got off the train he did not have any grips; that after walking eight or ten steps Deputy Sheriff McClelland “hollered” at him and said. “I will take those grips and you, too, to Muskogee,” and witness answered, “What grips?” that he looked and saw two grips on the ground eight or ten steps from -him.

Upon a careful examination of the record in this case, we are satisfied tha none of the alleged errors are well taken. It was for the jury to determine to what extent they would give credit to the defendant’s testimony.

Finding no errors prejudicial to the defendant, the judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1915 OK CR 273, 165 P. 632, 14 Okla. Crim. 678, 1915 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shoemake-v-state-oklacrimapp-1915.