TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Simpson v. State

E. Simpson v. State.

Simpson v. State, 1910 OK CR 213, 111 P. 947
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 23, 1910
Docket
No. A-304.
Judges
Chriam
Citations
111 P. 9471910 OK CR 2134 Okla. Crim. 3761910 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 74
Disposition
Reversed and remanded.
Cited by 16
Syllabus
INTOXICATING LIQUORS — Information — Sufficiency — Conveying Liquor in State. An information charging a defendant with having conveyed intoxicating liquor from one place in the state of Oklahoma to another place in the state must fay proper allegations so identify the particular transaction as to enable the defendant to prepare for trial. (Syllabus by the Court.)
Summary
Appeal from Washita County Cowrlj R. L. Shem, Judge. E. Simpson was convicted of a violation of the prohibitory liquor law, and 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 — Chriam

PER CHRIAM.

The information in this case charged the defendant with having unlawfully carried intoxicating liquor from one place in the State of Oklahoma to another place in said state. The defendant demurred to the information, upon the ground that it did not charge the defendant with the commission of any offense. The court overruled the demurrer, and the defendant excepted.

We think that the demurrer to the information should have *377 been sustained. The information should have contained such descriptive averments as would have enabled the defendant to identify the particular transaction, for which he was to be tried, and thereby enable him to prepare for trial. See Sturgis v. State, 2 Okla. Cr. 363 , 102 Pac. 57 .

The judgment of the lower court is reversed, with directions to the trial judge to sustain the demurrer to the information.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 16 cases

View all citing references →
1918: 21919: 21920: 11921: 11922: 11925: 21926: 11939: 21941: 11943: 11948: 11950: 119182026peak 1918 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Trent v. State1950 OK CR 152, 225 P.2d 191
  2. Hatfield v. State1918 OK CR 61, 173 P. 531
  3. Newby v. State1920 OK CR 54, 188 P. 124
  4. Tanner v. State135 S.E. 917 (Ga. 1926)
  5. Abby v. State114 P.2d 499 (Okla. Crim. App. 1941)
  6. Herndon v. State1919 OK CR 325, 185 P. 701

Most recent

  1. Trent v. State1950 OK CR 152, 225 P.2d 191
  2. Ray v. State1948 OK CR 11, 189 P.2d 620
  3. Smith v. State1943 OK CR 82, 140 P.2d 237
  4. Abby v. State114 P.2d 499 (Okla. Crim. App. 1941)
  5. Tucker v. State1939 OK CR 72, 92 P.2d 595
  6. Alexander v. State1939 OK CR 52, 90 P.2d 949

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
Sturgis v. State, 1909 OK CR 66, 102 P. 57 100

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