TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Simpson v. State

Charley Simpson v. State.

Simpson v. State, 1913 OK CR 305, 136 P. 778
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 2, 1913
Docket
No. A-1809.
Judges
Doyle, Armstrong, Furman
Citations
136 P. 7781913 OK CR 30510 Okla. Crim. 3471913 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 354
Disposition
Affirmed.
Syllabus
APPEAL — Burglary—Evidence. In a prosecution for burglary, the evidence held sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment of conviction, and that no reversible error was committed on the-trial.
Summary
Appeal from District Court, Comanche County; J. T. Johnson, Judge. Charley L. Simpson was convicted of burglary, 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 — Doyle

DOYLE, J.

This appeal is prosecuted from a conviction had in the district court of Comanche county on the 29th day of January, 1912, in which the defendant was found guilty of burglary' and his punishment assessed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of seven years.

It is disclosed by the record that plaintiff in error and L. L. Dorsey were jointly charged in the information with the crime of burglary, alleged to have been committed on the 25th day of December, 1911, by breaking and entering into, in the nighttime, a certain store building in the cit}' of Lawton. The defendant Dorsey pleaded guilty.

The proof on the part of the state amply justified the jury in finding the defendant guilty, and no evidence was introduced in behalf of the defendant. No authority is cited in support of the contentions made, and after a careful examination of the questions raised we are satisfied that under well-settled rules, sustained and upheld by the decisions of this court, no error was committed prejudicial to the substantial rights of the defendant.

The judgment of conviction is therefore affirmed.

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.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites 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