Stinson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Stinson v. State

1923 OK CR 158, 215 P. 1119, 24 Okla. Crim. 46, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 264

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 15, 1923

DocketNo. A-4222.

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK CR 158 (Stinson 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

Stinson v. State, 1923 OK CR 158, 215 P. 1119, 24 Okla. Crim. 46, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 264 (Okla. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted in the district court of Muskogee county, on the 3d day of October, 1921, of the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon, and sentenced to serve a term of 3 years and 6 months in the state penitentiary. Petition in error and ease-made were filed in this court on the 27th day of February, 1922. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time the same was submitted. Rule 9 of this court (165 Pac. x) provides: “When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadingsy the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and *47 if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.” After an examination of the pleadings, the instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence, the court finds that no prejudicial error occurred sufficient to authorize a reversal of this judgment, and the same is therefore affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error was convicted in the district court of Muskogee county, on the 3d day of October, 1921, of the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon, and sentenced to serve a term of 3 years and 6 months in the state penitentiary. Petition in error and ease-made were filed in this court on the 27th day of February, 1922. No brief has been filed in behalf of plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made to orally argue the cause at the time the same was submitted. Rule 9 of this court (165 Pac. x) provides: “When no counsel appears, and no briefs are filed, the court will examine the pleadingsy the instructions of the court and the exceptions taken thereto, and the judgment and sentence, and *47 if no prejudicial error appears, will affirm the judgment.” After an examination of the pleadings, the instructions of the court, and the judgment and sentence, the court finds that no prejudicial error occurred sufficient to authorize a reversal of this judgment, and the same is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK CR 158, 215 P. 1119, 24 Okla. Crim. 46, 1923 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stinson-v-state-oklacrimapp-1923.