Standifer v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Standifer v. State

1913 OK CR 202, 132 P. 1198, 9 Okla. Crim. 725, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 236

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 17, 1913

DocketNo. A-1574.

StatusPublished

This text of 1913 OK CR 202 (Standifer 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

Standifer v. State, 1913 OK CR 202, 132 P. 1198, 9 Okla. Crim. 725, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 236 (Okla. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Walter Standifer, was convicted at the October, 1911, term of the county court of Pottawatomie county on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor with intent to sell the same, and his punishment fixed at a fine of one hundred fifty dollars and confinement in the county jail for a period of sixty days. The record in this case discloses the fact that there was some incompetent testimony admitted at the trial, but upon the whole case we are unable to say that this judgment should be reversed. In our judgment there is no miscarriage of justice. The plaintiff in error is clearly guilty. Let the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Walter Standifer, was convicted at the October, 1911, term of the county court of Pottawatomie county on a charge of having the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor with intent to sell the same, and his punishment fixed at a fine of one hundred fifty dollars and confinement in the county jail for a period of sixty days. The record in this case discloses the fact that there was some incompetent testimony admitted at the trial, but upon the whole case we are unable to say that this judgment should be reversed. In our judgment there is no miscarriage of justice. The plaintiff in error is clearly guilty. Let the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1913 OK CR 202, 132 P. 1198, 9 Okla. Crim. 725, 1913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standifer-v-state-oklacrimapp-1913.