TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Aubrey v. State

C.B. Aubrey v. State.

Aubrey v. State, 1927 OK CR 323, 260 P. 783
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 29, 1927
Docket
No. A-6073.
Judges
Edwards, Doyle, Davenport
Citations
260 P. 7831927 OK CR 32338 Okla. Crim. 2711927 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 333

Opinion of the Court — Edwards

EDWARDS, J.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Creek county on a charge of unlawfully operating a still and was sentenced to pay a fine of $250 and to serve 60 days in the county jail. The judgment was entered on November 16, 1925. Defendant was allowed 40 days to make and serve case-made, but no extension of time within which to file the petition in error was made beyond the 60-day period allowed by section 2808, Comp. St. 1821. Thereafter on December 22, 30 days’ extension from that date was allowed in which to make and serve case-made; 10 days to suggest amendments to be settled and signed on 5 days’ notice: No order was made extending the time within which the petition in error and case-made should be filed in this court. Again on January 21, 1926, an extension of 15 days to make and serve case-made was entered, but no order was made extending the time in which to file the appeal in this court. The appeal was filed February 19, 1926, more than 60 days after the rendition of judgment. This court did not acquire jurisdiction. Holly v. State, 16 Okla. Cr. 164 , 181 P. 518 , and cases therein cited. Further, the record does not show that any notice of appeal was ever given as required by section 2809, Comp. St. 1921. When the motion for a new trial was overruled, defendant gave notice (presumably in open'court) of his intention to appeal and requested that notice be spread of record. This was evidently an attempt to comply with the provisions of chapter 219, Session Laws 1917 (section 782, Comp. St. 1921). This court has frequently held that this provision of the law applies only in civil cases and has no application to appeals in criminal cases. Burgess v. State, 18 Okla. Cr. 574 , 197 P. 173 ; Merritt v. State, 35 Okla. Cr. 194 , 249 P. 436 .

*273 For the reasons assigned, the appeal .is dismissed.

DOYLE, P. J., concurs.

DAVENPORT, J., absent, not participating.

How later courts describe this case

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

1929: 21931: 21933: 119292026peak 1929 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Brown v. State1933 OK CR 61, 23 P.2d 719
  2. Erwin v. State1929 OK CR 228, 278 P. 397
  3. Gamble v. State1929 OK CR 249, 278 P. 665
  4. Dodd v. State1931 OK CR 248, 299 P. 504
  5. Cockburn v. State1931 OK CR 249, 299 P. 505

Most recent

  1. Brown v. State1933 OK CR 61, 23 P.2d 719
  2. Dodd v. State1931 OK CR 248, 299 P. 504
  3. Cockburn v. State1931 OK CR 249, 299 P. 505
  4. Gamble v. State1929 OK CR 249, 278 P. 665
  5. Erwin v. State1929 OK CR 228, 278 P. 397

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
Burgess v. State, 1921 OK CR 62, 197 P. 173 22
Holly v. State, 181 P. 518 (Okla. Crim. App. 1919) 10
Merritt v. State, 1926 OK CR 353, 249 P. 436 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