Wingfield v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the CourtDavenport, J.
The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called the defendant, was convicted of the crime of receiving stolen property and his penalty fixed at a fine of $25, and he appeals. The theory of the state is that the defendant, for a consideration, received from one Gaston Van Ross a trailer which had been stolen from R. G. Pearce; that the defendant bought the trailer knowing at the time he purchased the same it had been stolen. The state relied principally upon circumstantial evidence and the statements alleged to have been made by the defendant to the officers while under arrest.
The defendant…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sutton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1926
- McSpadden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1913
- Weaver v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925
- Popp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1929
- Bramble v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Camp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1939
- Alberty v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1939
- Lewis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1945
- Walker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1946