Lucas 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. From a conviction on a charge of vagrancy under the first subdivision of section 1956, 'Comp. St. 1921, the defendant has appealed. The substance of the assignments of error challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. The first subdivision of section 1956, supra, defines a vagrant as “an idle person who lives without any means, or who has no visible support and makes no exertion to obtain a livelihood by honest employment.”
The defendant did not challenge the insufficiency of the evidence of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jenkins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1921
- Armstead v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1915
3Cited by1 opinion
- Parker v. Municipal Judge of City of Las VegasNevada Supreme Court · 1967