TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Whitlow v. State

Leo Whitlow v. State.

Whitlow v. State, 1947 OK CR 91, 184 P.2d 253
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
August 27, 1947
Docket
No. A-10709.
Judges
Brett, Barefoot, Jones
Citations
184 P.2d 2531947 OK CR 9185 Okla. Crim. 21947 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 254
Cited by 23

Opinion of the Court — Brett

BRETT, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of Carter county, Okla., wherein Leo Whitlow was charged, by information, with the crime of murder on August 2, 1944, of one Titus Ross in Ardmore, Carter county, Okla. He was tried, by a jury, convicted of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentenced to four years in the penitentiary. A new trial having been denied, he appealed from the judgment by filing in this court, on January 9, 1946, a petition in error with case-made attached.

No brief has been filed in this case and no appearance on behalf of the defendant was made at the time said cause was set for hearing on the 13th day of November, 1948, or at any time subsequent thereto. Where the defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction and neither any brief is filed nor appearance for oral argument made, this court will examine the record and the evidence, and if no error prejudicial to the substantial rights of the defendant is apparent, will affirm the judgment; Smith v. State, 70 Okla. Cr. 81 , 104 P. 2d 1009 ; Walker v. State, 60 Okla. Cr. 302 , 64 P. 2d 935 ; Owens v. State, 60 Okla. Cr. 324 , 64 P. 2d 1234 . This court will examine the record for jurisdictional errors. If no fundamental error appears, the judgment will be affirmed.

We have carefully examined the record and find that the information is sufficient to support the conviction of first degree manslaughter.

On the record before us, we have discovered no error which would warrant a reversal of the judgment of con *4 vietion and it appears that the defendant was accorded a fair and impartial trial.

The judgment of the district court of Carter county is accordingly affirmed.

BAREFOOT, P. J., and JONES, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 23 cases

View all citing references →
1949: 21950: 61951: 31952: 11953: 31954: 51955: 21956: 119492026peak 1950 · 6

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Wilson v. State1949 OK CR 87, 212 P.2d 144
  2. Woods v. State1950 OK CR 90, 220 P.2d 463
  3. Patterson v. State1953 OK CR 137, 261 P.2d 903
  4. Yost v. State1954 OK CR 53, 269 P.2d 794
  5. Payne v. State1952 OK CR 21, 239 P.2d 801
  6. Mann v. State1950 OK CR 50, 217 P.2d 547

Most recent

  1. Redding v. State1956 OK CR 83, 301 P.2d 371
  2. Dunnam v. State1955 OK CR 49, 282 P.2d 778
  3. Hunnicutt v. State1955 OK CR 41, 281 P.2d 767
  4. Washburn v. State1954 OK CR 137, 276 P.2d 940
  5. Stewart v. State1954 OK CR 127, 275 P.2d 1019
  6. Washington v. State1954 OK CR 113, 272 P.2d 368

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Walker v. State, 1937 OK CR 14, 64 P.2d 935 9
Smith v. State, 1940 OK CR 90, 104 P.2d 1009 9
Owens v. State, 1937 OK CR 18, 64 P.2d 1234 6

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