Legal Opinion

Crawford v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided April 27, 1926No. A-5388PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBessey, P. J.

Arch Crawford, plaintiff in error, herein designated the defendant, was by verdict of a jury found guilty of the larceny of an automobile, with his punishment assessed by the jury at confinement in the state reformatory at Granite for a period of five years.

Four assignments of error are urged in this appeal: (1) That the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict; (2) that there was a fatal variance between the allegations and the proof; (3) error in the court’s instructions to the jury; (4) that the judgment does not conform to the verdict.

The evidence for the state discloses that the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ex Parte HayesCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1911
  2. Leyerle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925
  3. Carson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1925
  4. Dickson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
  5. Smith-M'Cord Dry Goods Co. v. Jno. B. Farwell Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Burns v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1941
  2. Heglin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Thomas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1928
  4. Dean v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1988
  5. Copeland v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API