Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided January 16, 1946No. A-10497Published

1DissentJones, P. J.

I respectfully dissent because, as I view the record, the verdict rendered by the jury is too indefinite and uncertain to sustain the judgment pronounced against the defendant.

It is only when the jury does not attempt to fix the punishment in their verdict that the trial court may do so. 22 O. S. 1941 § 927.

Here, however, the jury attempted to fix the verdict. The punishment was not left to the court. In order for this conviction to be affirmed, this court must guess that the jury meant to fix the punishment at 7 years, as there is nothing on the face of the verdict to indicate that such was…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ex Parte MeadowsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1940
  2. Ex Parte HightowerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1917
  3. Ex Parte HarrisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912
  4. George v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1924
  5. Campbell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1918

4 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