Legal Opinion
Hawkins v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided June 30, 1923No. A-4042PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMatson, P. J.
(after/ stating the facts as above). The first assignment of error presented and urged in the brief relates to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. Under this general assignment counsel have grouped six separate assignments contained in the petition in error, all relating to the general question of the sufficiency of the evidence. It follows, therefore, that, if the evidence is held to be sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment, the assignments thus grouped under this head are each held to be without merit, without further reference thereto in this opinion.
As…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ruloff v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Holmes v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1911
- Caples v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
- Ford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912
- Addington v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1913
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ball v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930
- Goss v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1923
- Whitenack v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930
- Tate v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1929
- Kell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1931
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.