Stanley v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Stanley v. State

1935 OK CR 136, 50 P.2d 1150, 58 Okla. Crim. 106, 1935 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 135

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedOctober 11, 1935

DocketNo. A-8917.

StatusPublished

This text of 1935 OK CR 136 (Stanley 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

Stanley v. State, 1935 OK CR 136, 50 P.2d 1150, 58 Okla. Crim. 106, 1935 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 135 (Okla. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, was convicted of the crime of burglary in the second degree, a third and subsequent offense, and was sentenced to imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of ten years, and appeals.

The time for filing brief on behalf of the plaintiff in error has expired. No brief has been filed in support of defendant’s assignments of error.

The record has been carefully examined. The testimony is conflicting, which was a question for the jury. There are no fundamental or prejudicial errors in the record. The jury after carefully considering the evidence found there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant. The case is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, was convicted of the crime of burglary in the second degree, a third and subsequent offense, and was sentenced to imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a term of ten years, and appeals.

The time for filing brief on behalf of the plaintiff in error has expired. No brief has been filed in support of defendant’s assignments of error.

The record has been carefully examined. The testimony is conflicting, which was a question for the jury. There are no fundamental or prejudicial errors in the record. The jury after carefully considering the evidence found there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant. The case is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1935 OK CR 136, 50 P.2d 1150, 58 Okla. Crim. 106, 1935 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-v-state-oklacrimapp-1935.