TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Thurmond v. State

A. L. Thurmond v. State.

Thurmond v. State, 1938 OK CR 110, 84 P.2d 446
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 15, 1938
Docket
No. A-9361.
Judges
Davenport, Doyle, Barefoot
Citations
84 P.2d 4461938 OK CR 11065 Okla. Crim. 2171938 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 94

Opinion of the Court — Davenport

DAVENPORT, P. J.

The defendant was by information charged with murder, was tried and convicted of manslaughter in the second degree, and sentenced to serve, a term of two years in the state penitentiary, and has by transcript appealed to this court.

Section 3146, O. S. 1931, 22 Okla. St. Ann. § 977, defines what shall constitute the record in a case and makes it the duty of the clerk of the court to annex together and file in the clerk’s office:

“(1) The indictment and a copy of the minutes of the plea or demurrer.

“(2) A copy of the minutes of the trial.

“(3) The charges given or refused, and the.indorse-ments, if any, thereon; and, “(4) A copy of the judgment.”

*218 When the defendant attempts to appeal by transcript it is his duty to have a complete record of the pleadings up to and including a copy of the judgment filed in this court.

The purported transcript filed by the defendant does not show a complete transcript and record as it does not include a complete copy of the clerk’s minutes as required by the statute. The transcript has been carefully examined, and the court finds the information is sufficient to advise the defendant of the charge against him, and to enable him to prepare properly to meet the charge.

This case was filed in this court on July 15, 1937, and was assigned for oral argument on March 29, 1938, plaintiff’s brief to be filed by March 29, 1938. On March 29, 1938, the case was submitted on the record. No brief has been filed by the defendant in support of his assignment of errors. The court therefore assumes the appeal has been abandoned or that counsel representing the defendant has reached the conclusion there are no errors in the transcript sufficient to warrant a reversal. Tucker v. State, 8 Okla. Cr. 392 , 127 P. 882 ; Poole v. State, 37 Okla. Cr. 59 , 256 P. 67 .

The transcript has been carefully examined and an examination fails to disclose any prejudicial or fundamental errors. The case is affirmed.

DOYLE and BAREFOOT, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1940: 119402026peak 1940 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Boston1940 OK CR 65, 102 P.2d 889

Most recent

  1. State v. Boston1940 OK CR 65, 102 P.2d 889

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Poole v. State, 1927 OK CR 151, 256 P. 67 3
Tucker v. State, 1912 OK CR 412, 127 P. 882 1

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