TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Rogers v. State

Chick Rogers v. State.

Rogers v. State, 1932 OK CR 60, 8 P.2d 1111
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 4, 1932
Docket
No. A-8314.
Judges
Chappell, Davenport, Edwards
Citations
8 P.2d 11111932 OK CR 6053 Okla. Crim. 1731932 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 41

Opinion of the Court — Chappell

CHAPPELL, J.

The plaintiff in error was convicted in the district court of Oklahoma county on a charge of larceny of an automobile, and his punishment fixed by the jury at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a period of 11 years.

The judgment in this case was rendered on the 5th day of May, 1931. The petition in error was filed on the 11th day of December, 1931, same being more than, six months after the date the judgment was rendered.

Section 2808, C. O. S. 1921, in part reads:

“* * * In felony cases the appeal must be taken within six months after the judgment is rendered. * * *”

The statute fixes the time for appeal. This court is without power to extend the terms of the statute. When, as in this case, the appeal is filed after the expiration of the six months’ period, this court does not acquire jurisdiction, but must dismiss the appeal. Peyton v. State, 41 Okla. Cr. 186 , 270 Pac. 860 .

In the case at bar, the appeal was filed within six months after the trial court had. overruled defendant’s second motion for a new trial on account of newly discovered evidence. The six months began to run at the date the judgment and sentence was pronounced, and not at the time the motion for a new trial was overruled. Howey v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 453 , 132 Pac. 499 ; Clark v. State, 18 Okla. Cr. 145 , 193 Pac. 1008 , 1009; George v. State, 21 Okla. Cr. 240 , 205 Pac. 942 ; Heath v. State, 22 *175 Okla. Cr. 122, 210 Pac. 560 ; Criner v. State, 37 Okla. Cr. 313 , 258 Pac. 359 ; Easterwood v. State, 38 Okla. Cr. 72 , 259 Pac. 181 .

For the reason stated, the attempted appeal is dismissed, and the cause remanded to the district court, with directions to enforce the judgment.

DAVENPORT, P. J., concurs. EDWARDS, J., absent; not participating.

How later courts describe this case

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

1932: 11943: 12006: 119322026peak 1932 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Monzell v. State1943 OK CR 119, 143 P.2d 163
  2. Todd v. Miller192 F. App'x 731 (10th Cir. 2006)
  3. Rosell v. State1932 OK CR 101, 11 P.2d 766

Most recent

  1. Todd v. Miller192 F. App'x 731 (10th Cir. 2006)
  2. Monzell v. State1943 OK CR 119, 143 P.2d 163
  3. Rosell v. State1932 OK CR 101, 11 P.2d 766

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 7

DepthCaseCited by
Howey v. State, 1913 OK CR 129, 132 P. 499 26
Criner v. State, 1927 OK CR 191, 258 P. 359 8
Easterwood v. State, 1927 OK CR 255, 259 P. 181 8
George v. State, 1922 OK CR 88, 205 P. 942 5
Peyton v. State, 1928 OK CR 295, 270 P. 860 3
Heath v. State, 1922 OK CR 163, 210 P. 560 14
Clark v. State, 1920 OK CR 235, 193 P. 1009 9

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