TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Autry v. State

H.G. Autry v. State.

Autry v. State, 1919 OK CR 304, 184 P. 786
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 8, 1919
Docket
No. A-3189.
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
184 P. 7861919 OK CR 30416 Okla. Crim. 7181919 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 269
Disposition
Affirmed.
Summary
Appeal from District Court, Jefferson County; Cham Jones, Judge. H. G. Autry was convicted of assault, and he appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This judgment of conviction is sought to be reversed upon one ground alone, to wit, that the verdict is not sustained by sufficient evidence.

The defendant was indicted in the district court of Jefferson county, charged with the crime of assaulting one Lum Stroud with a shotgun with intent to kill him. The cause was tried to a jury, and a verdict returned, which by its terms finds the defendant guilty of a simple assault, and fixes his punishment at 15 days’ imprisonment in the county jail.

The evidence on the part of the state shows that the defendant assaulted one Lum Stroud, and attempted to shoot' him with a shotgun, and that the defendant would have done so had not defendant’s wife and son interfered and prevented the defendant from inflicting any wounds upon the prosecuting witness. The evidence for the defense was directly in conflict with that for the state.

Where the evidence is conflicting, this court will not disturb a judgment of conviction unless the evidence for the prosecution, if be *719 lieved, is entirely insufficient to support the judgment. In this .case.-: the state's evidence is sufficient to support the verdict and judgment, and it was for the jury to decide the conflict in the evidence. Having done so adversely to the defendant, the judgment of conviction must stand, and it is hereby affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list