Vaughn v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Vaughn v. State

1925 OK CR 173, 234 P. 1118, 30 Okla. Crim. 21, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 2, 1925

DocketNo. A-5117.

StatusPublished

This text of 1925 OK CR 173 (Vaughn 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

Vaughn v. State, 1925 OK CR 173, 234 P. 1118, 30 Okla. Crim. 21, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188 (Okla. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Wesley Vaughn, was found guilty of the crime of pointing a pistol at another, and by the verdict of the jury his punishment was fixed at confinement in the county jail for a term of 12 months and to pay a fine of $500. From a judgment in accordance with the verdict he appealed to this court. The plaintiff in error, for himself and by his attorneys of record, has filed a motion abandoning the appeal and asking that the appeal be dismissed. An examination of the record disclosed that there is no merit in the appeal, and that the motion should be sustained and the appeal dismissed. It is therefore so ordered. Mandate forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error, Wesley Vaughn, was found guilty of the crime of pointing a pistol at another, and by the verdict of the jury his punishment was fixed at confinement in the county jail for a term of 12 months and to pay a fine of $500. From a judgment in accordance with the verdict he appealed to this court. The plaintiff in error, for himself and by his attorneys of record, has filed a motion abandoning the appeal and asking that the appeal be dismissed. An examination of the record disclosed that there is no merit in the appeal, and that the motion should be sustained and the appeal dismissed. It is therefore so ordered. Mandate forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1925 OK CR 173, 234 P. 1118, 30 Okla. Crim. 21, 1925 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 188, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vaughn-v-state-oklacrimapp-1925.