State v. One Ford Automobile
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from County Court, Canadian County ; R. B. Forrest, Judge. Proceeding by the State against one Ford Automobile in the possession of C. 0. Sanford on the public highway in section 3, township- 10, range 7 W. I. M., Canadian county; V. L. Nesbitt,, intervener. Motion of intervener to dismiss the proceedings, for want of jurisdiction sustained, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
GALBRAITH, C.
This was a proceeding under section 3617 of the Revised Laws of 1910 to confiscate one Ford automobile which had been seized by the sheriff without warrant on the 31st of day of January, 1917, on the charge that it had been unlawfully used in transporting 160 quarts of whisky along the public highway lrom one point in the state to another contrary to law. The sheriff filed a return of the seizure with the county court, and an order was made directing that the prop ei’ty seized be held until discharged by due process of law. Nesbitt appeared in said action claiming that…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- One Cadillac Automobile v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commercial Credit Co. v. State Ex Rel.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- Mozley v. ColemanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Sharpe v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919