Legal Opinion

McAdoo v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided February 19, 1927No. A-5761PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.

The plaintiff in error, hereinafter called defendant, was convicted in the county court of Cleveland county on a charge of maintaining a liquor nuisance, and his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the county jail for a term of 90 days and a fine of $250.

The defendant directs his argument principally to the contention that the search warrant under which the officers acted, and by which all material evidence was procured, was invalid because it did not run in the name of the state of Oklahoma. The Attorney General has filed a confession of error, that part applicable to the question before us…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Caples v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
  2. Richmond v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  3. Martin v. HostetterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Latimer v. GilesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  5. Conditt v. McKinleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Dunn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1928
  2. Bishop v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930
  3. Stewart v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1941
  4. Myers v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1928
  5. Laub v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API