Legal Opinion

Hildebrandt v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided October 14, 1922No. A-3423PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatson, J.

Plaintiff in error (hereinafter referred to as defendant) attacks the constitutionality of the law (section 2, c. 26, Session Laws 1913). The questions involved under such assignment of error were decided adversely to defendant in the case of Hildebrandt v. State, 19 Okla. Cr. 30, 197 Pac. 852.

Defendant in this court for the first time attacks the sufficiency of the information. While the information is not a model of criminal pleading, it is sufficient in the opinion of the court to withstand the objections urged against it.

Defendant was convicted of the unlawful possession of intoxicating…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hildebrandt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1920

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stafford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1983
  2. Lavicky v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1981
  3. Wood v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1941
  4. Mason v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1937
  5. Seigler v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1932

1 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