Walling v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Walling v. State

1910 OK CR 222, 111 P. 1101, 4 Okla. Crim. 414, 1910 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 95

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 3, 1910

DocketNo. A-148.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1910 OK CR 222 (Walling 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

Walling v. State, 1910 OK CR 222, 111 P. 1101, 4 Okla. Crim. 414, 1910 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 95 (Okla. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

DOYLE, Judge.

Stoke E. Walling was indicted in the Dnited States Court within and for the Southern District of the Indian Territor}', at Ardmore, at the April term, A. D. 1907, for the murder of one Moses T. Jackson, on the 39th day of March, 1907, within that part of said jurisdiction which was organized as Marshall county when Oklahoma was admitted as a state. Dnder the provisions of the enabling act and the state Constitution, he was tried in the district court of Marshall county. On December 1, 1908, the jury sworn to try the case returned a verdict, finding *415 Hie defendant guilty of manslaughter, and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of $500.

A motion for a new trial was filed, and on December 3, 1908, the same was overruled, and the court rendered judgment and sentence in accordance with said verdict, from which judgment an appeal was properly perfected by filing in this court on April %*{, 1909, a petition in error with case-made attached and proof of service of notice of appeal. No briefs have been filed by plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made on his behalf when the cause was called for oral argument.

On August 29, 1910, the Attorney General filed a motion to affirm the judgment for want of prosecution. It is apparent that the appeal in this case has been substantially abandoned, and for this reason we would be justified in sustaining the action of the court below without further examination of the record. Nevertheless, in deference to the gravity of the ease, we have deemed it our duty to fully and carefully examine the record.

Having so examined the entire record, and finding no substantial error therein, and that no substantial right of the defendant has been lost, and believing that a fair and impartial trial was had, the judgment of the district court of Marshall county is therefore in all things affirmed.

FURMAN, Presiding Judge, concurs; RICHARDSON, Judge,, who presided in the court below, disqualified and not sitting.

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

DOYLE, Judge.

Stoke E. Walling was indicted in the Dnited States Court within and for the Southern District of the Indian Territor}', at Ardmore, at the April term, A. D. 1907, for the murder of one Moses T. Jackson, on the 39th day of March, 1907, within that part of said jurisdiction which was organized as Marshall county when Oklahoma was admitted as a state. Dnder the provisions of the enabling act and the state Constitution, he was tried in the district court of Marshall county. On December 1, 1908, the jury sworn to try the case returned a verdict, finding *415 Hie defendant guilty of manslaughter, and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of $500.

A motion for a new trial was filed, and on December 3, 1908, the same was overruled, and the court rendered judgment and sentence in accordance with said verdict, from which judgment an appeal was properly perfected by filing in this court on April %*{, 1909, a petition in error with case-made attached and proof of service of notice of appeal. No briefs have been filed by plaintiff in error, and no appearance was made on his behalf when the cause was called for oral argument.

On August 29, 1910, the Attorney General filed a motion to affirm the judgment for want of prosecution. It is apparent that the appeal in this case has been substantially abandoned, and for this reason we would be justified in sustaining the action of the court below without further examination of the record. Nevertheless, in deference to the gravity of the ease, we have deemed it our duty to fully and carefully examine the record.

Having so examined the entire record, and finding no substantial error therein, and that no substantial right of the defendant has been lost, and believing that a fair and impartial trial was had, the judgment of the district court of Marshall county is therefore in all things affirmed.

FURMAN, Presiding Judge, concurs; RICHARDSON, Judge,, who presided in the court below, disqualified and not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1910 OK CR 222, 111 P. 1101, 4 Okla. Crim. 414, 1910 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walling-v-state-oklacrimapp-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack