Wampler v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Wampler v. State

1927 OK CR 267, 258 P. 1119, 38 Okla. Crim. 102, 1927 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 9, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 1927 OK CR 267 (Wampler 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

Wampler v. State, 1927 OK CR 267, 258 P. 1119, 38 Okla. Crim. 102, 1927 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253 (Okla. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

EDWARDS, J.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the county court upon a charge of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, and was sentenced to serve a term of 30 days in the county jail and to pay a fine of $2.50. The judgment was rendered November 7, 1925, and the appeal lodged in this court on March 2, 1926. No briefs have been filed in support of the appeal, and no appearance for oral argument was made at the time the case was submitted. We have examined the record, and find that the information correctly charges the offense, the evidence sustains the verdict, and no prejudicial error is apparent. The case is affirmed.

DOYLE, P. J., concurs. DAVENPORT, J., absent, not participating.

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

EDWARDS, J.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the county court upon a charge of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor, and was sentenced to serve a term of 30 days in the county jail and to pay a fine of $2.50. The judgment was rendered November 7, 1925, and the appeal lodged in this court on March 2, 1926. No briefs have been filed in support of the appeal, and no appearance for oral argument was made at the time the case was submitted. We have examined the record, and find that the information correctly charges the offense, the evidence sustains the verdict, and no prejudicial error is apparent. The case is affirmed.

DOYLE, P. J., concurs. DAVENPORT, J., absent, not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1927 OK CR 267, 258 P. 1119, 38 Okla. Crim. 102, 1927 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wampler-v-state-oklacrimapp-1927.