Ex Parte Simmons
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
On motion for rehearing.
1Opinion of the Court
FURMAN, PRESIDING Judge.
It is earnestly contended by
the attorneys for the petitioner that the original opinion of this court, published in 4 Okla. Cr. 662, 112 Pac. 951, is in conflict with the statutes and Constitution of Oklahoma and with controlling decisions, but of what courts they ,do not say.
But two propositions are presented in their petition for a rehearing and in the brief filed in support thereof. The first is that the charter of the city of Tulsa does not expressly grant the power to prohibit within said city the unlawful possession of liquor for the purpose of sale. The second is…
2Cases cited95 opinions
- United States v. CruikshankSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Davidson v. New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Barron Ex Rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
- Callan v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Spies v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Prowant v. SealySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
- Ex Parte JohnsonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1921
- Ex Parte JohnsonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1917
- Ex Parte StrauchCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1945
- Gardenhire v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1923
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.