TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dupree v. State

Jim Dupree v. State.

Dupree v. State, 1927 OK CR 40, 252 P. 857
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
February 5, 1927
Docket
No. A-5562.
Judges
Edwards, Doyle, Davenport
Citations
252 P. 8571927 OK CR 4036 Okla. Crim. 1421927 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 128

Opinion of the Court — Edwards

EDWARDS, J.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Oklahoma county on a charge of maintaining a public nuisance where whisky was manufactured, sold, bartered, and given away, and sentenced to pay a fine of $500 and to be confined in the county jail for a period of six months.

*143 Defendant operated a small stand a few miles north of Oklahoma City, on the Edmond road, where he resided and sold gasoline, lunches, cold drinks, and probably surrepetitiously furnished intoxicating liquor. A temporary injunction against this place was procured in the district court of Oklahoma county, and certain officers went there to serve the order and nail up the house. They entered and made a search and found some glasses, in one of which was a small amount of corn whisky. Near the house was found a sack with a half pint bottle in it, which also contained a little whisky. Across the paved highway, some 100 yards away, was found a box containing several bottles, in some of which was a small quantity of whisky.

Defendant objected to the introduction of the evidence obtained by the search and objected to argument and reference to the injunction suit. These objections were overruled. This, we think, was error. The search was made without a search warrant. It was not authorized by the injunction process and on timely objection should have been excluded. The argument of the assistant county attorney, as shown by the record, also was error, since, apparently, the injunction was issued ex parte and no trial had been had on that matter. If the defendant had liquor about his premises, the state could easily have procured a search warrant and have proceeded according to law.

The case is reversed and remanded.

DOYLE, P. J., and DAVENPORT, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1939: 119392026peak 1939 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Yeargain v. State1939 OK CR 112, 93 P.2d 1104

Most recent

  1. Yeargain v. State1939 OK CR 112, 93 P.2d 1104

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