Legal Opinion

Buford v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided May 9, 1924No. A-4398PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatson, P. J.

(after stating the facts as above). The sole assignment of error is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment. For such reason we have considered it advisable to quote copiously from the testimony given by the witnesses for both the state and the defendant.

Counsel for defendant contend that the circumstances of recent possession, coupled with an untruthful statement or an evasive statement by defendant of the length of time he had been in possession of the stolen property, should not have resulted in his conviction.

We believe counsel overlooked other incriminating…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Western Roofing Tile Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Halsey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1929
  2. Love v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1957
  3. Foust v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1927
  4. Miller v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1932
  5. Skinner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1934

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