Legal Opinion

Arnold v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided June 21, 1913No. A-1311PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFurman, J.

(after stating the facts as above). First. Appellant demurred to the information, setting up 17 different reasons why the information did not state facts sufficient to constitute an offense. The court overruled the demurrer, to which appellant excepted.

Counsel for appellant has displayed great ingenuity and learning in support of his objections to the information, and if the common-law doctrine of a strict construction of indictments and informations prevailed in this state, some of the objections urged by appellant would be good. But these objections are disposed of by the statutes of…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  2. Fritz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912
  3. In Re GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  4. Coleman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1911
  5. Anderson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1912

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. MessinoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
  2. People v. MarshallNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
  3. Grissom v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 2011
  4. Tanique, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics & Dangerous DrugsCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2004
  5. Rigsby v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1933

10 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