TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Yota v. State

Levi Yota v. State.

Yota v. State, 1913 OK CR 249, 133 P. 257
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
July 12, 1913
Docket
No. A-1691.
Judges
Doyle, Armstrong, Furman
Citations
133 P. 2571913 OK CR 24910 Okla. Crim. 261913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 250
Disposition
Prosecution abated.
Syllabus
APPEAL — Death of Appellant — Abatement. In a criminal prosecution, the purpose of the proceeding being to punish the defendant in person, the action must necessarily abate upon his death; and where it is made to appear to the court that a plaintiff in error has died, pending the determination of his appeal, the cause will be abated.
Summary
Appeal from District Court, Latimer County; W. H. Broivn, Judge. Levi Yota was convicted of grand larceny, and brings error.

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

Opinion of the Court — Doyle

DOYLE, J.

Plaintiff in error, Levi Yota, was tried on an indictment by 'which he was charged with the theft of $123, the personal property of Sophia Carr; and on the 14th day of October, 1911, in accordance with the verdict of the jury, he was, by the court, sentenced to be imprisoned in the penitentiary for a term of eighteen months. To reverse the judgment an appeal was perfected by filing in this court on April 11, 1912, a petition in error with case-made.

Since the appeal was taken, and before the final submission of the cause, to wit, April 15, 1913, he departed this life, as shown by the affidavits of Ben Hoklotubbu and Silas Pusley, who depose and say that they personally knew and were well acquainted with the plaintiff in error, Levi Yota, for twenty years during his lifetime, and that he died at his home near Blanco, Pittsburg county, Okla., on said date. These affidavits are attached to and made apart of the suggestion of the death of the plaintiff in error, made by the Attorney General, and filed in this court on July 3, 1913.

In a criminal action, the purpose of the proceeding being to punish the defendant in person, the action must necessarily abate upon his death. It is therefore considered that the proceedings in this prosecution do abate.

It is so ordered.

ARMSTRONG, P. J., and FURMAN, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1915: 21927: 11937: 11939: 119152026peak 1915 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. High v. State1915 OK CR 86, 146 P. 1197
  2. Deweese v. State1937 OK CR 100, 69 P.2d 404
  3. Jeffries v. State1915 OK CR 26, 146 P. 1086
  4. Hardcastle v. State1939 OK CR 105, 93 P.2d 547
  5. State v. Guffey216 N.W. 860 (S.D. 1927)

Most recent

  1. Hardcastle v. State1939 OK CR 105, 93 P.2d 547
  2. Deweese v. State1937 OK CR 100, 69 P.2d 404
  3. State v. Guffey216 N.W. 860 (S.D. 1927)
  4. Jeffries v. State1915 OK CR 26, 146 P. 1086
  5. High v. State1915 OK CR 86, 146 P. 1197

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 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