From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nichols v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
Sep 30, 1916
159 P. 1091 (Okla. Crim. App. 1916)

Opinion

No. A-2625.

Opinion Filed September 30, 1916.

INTOXICATING LIQUORS — Offenses — Evidence — Sufficiency. In a prosecution for having possession of intoxicating liquors with intent to sell same, evidence held sufficient to sustain a conviction.

Appeal from the County Court of Pottawatomie County. Hal Johnson, Judge.

Leo Nichols, convicted of a violation of the prohibitory law, appeals. Affirmed.

Mark Goode, for plaintiff in error.

R. McMillan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


Plaintiff in error, Leo Nichols, was convicted in the county court of Pottawatomie county on a charge that he did have possession of intoxicating liquors, to-wit., whisky with intent to sell the same and his punishment assessed at confinement in the county jail for sixty days and a fine of Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars.

From the judgment and sentence entered on the verdict, he appealed by filing in this court on January 6, 1916, a petition in error with case-made.

The evidence shows that Gus Mitchell, deputy sheriff and two or three other deputies in serving a search warrant against the Old Herald Building in the city of Shawnee, found the defendant there in possession of certain intoxicating liquors, which he attempted to destroy in the presence of the officers. No evidence was offered on behalf of the defendant.

From a careful examination of the record, it appears that this appeal is wholly destitute of merit. The evidence of guilt is conclusive, and no material error is apparent. The judgment and sentence appealed from is therefore affirmed.


Summaries of

Nichols v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
Sep 30, 1916
159 P. 1091 (Okla. Crim. App. 1916)
Case details for

Nichols v. State

Case Details

Full title:LEO NICHOLS v. STATE

Court:Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma

Date published: Sep 30, 1916

Citations

159 P. 1091 (Okla. Crim. App. 1916)
159 P. 1091

Citing Cases

Unemployment Comp. Com. v. Bates

"* * * An unbroken line of authorities sustain this conclusion and to deny the motion to dismiss this appeal…

State v. Atkins

This rule blunts, if it does not entirely dissipate, the major criticism of private prosecutors, that they…