Prendergrast v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.
The plaintiff in error will be referred to as defendant, as in the court below, Defendant was convicted in the municipal criminal court of the city of Tulsa for having possession of whisky with intent to sell. Various assignments of error are presented attacking the constitutionality of the court, but as this contention has heretofore been decided adversely to defendant, it will not be further considered here. Buchanan v. State, 30 Okla. Cr. 362, 236 P. 903. Error is also predicated on the fact that the court called a jury for the trial of this case after express waiver by the defendant,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Buchanan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
- Bland v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1920
- Caffee v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1915
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1919
- Morrison v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925
3Cited by2 opinions
- Simmons v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925
- Peretto v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925