Woodruff v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Woodruff v. State

1969 OK CR 241, 462 P.2d 317, 1969 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 631

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 17, 1969

DocketNo. A-14845

StatusPublished

This text of 1969 OK CR 241 (Woodruff 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

Woodruff v. State, 1969 OK CR 241, 462 P.2d 317, 1969 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 631 (Okla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BRETT, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from a plea of guilty by Plaintiff in Error, James Earl Wood-ruff, hereafter referred to as defendant, to the crime of Burglary Second Degree, After Former Conviction of a Felony. He was sentenced by the trial court to serve a term of Ten Years in the State Peniténtiary, and his court-appointed counsel has perfected his appeal by transcript, alleging only that the sentence is excessive.

This Court has reviewed the transcript, and the briefs filed, and finds no merit to this Allegation. The records before the Court show that defendant received a fair trial; that he knowingly and intelligently entered his plea of guilty with full knowledge of the consequences thereof. Likewise, the defendant could have received from Two Years to Life Imprisonment, and the Ten Year Sentence he received is well within the statutory limits. The judgment and sentence is therefore, affirmed.

BUSSEY and NIX, JJ., concur.

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BRETT, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from a plea of guilty by Plaintiff in Error, James Earl Wood-ruff, hereafter referred to as defendant, to the crime of Burglary Second Degree, After Former Conviction of a Felony. He was sentenced by the trial court to serve a term of Ten Years in the State Peniténtiary, and his court-appointed counsel has perfected his appeal by transcript, alleging only that the sentence is excessive.

This Court has reviewed the transcript, and the briefs filed, and finds no merit to this Allegation. The records before the Court show that defendant received a fair trial; that he knowingly and intelligently entered his plea of guilty with full knowledge of the consequences thereof. Likewise, the defendant could have received from Two Years to Life Imprisonment, and the Ten Year Sentence he received is well within the statutory limits. The judgment and sentence is therefore, affirmed.

BUSSEY and NIX, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1969 OK CR 241, 462 P.2d 317, 1969 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 631, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodruff-v-state-oklacrimapp-1969.