Legal Opinion

Hildebrandt v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided September 25, 1920No. A-3399PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatson, J.

Among other questions involved in this appeal, it is contended that the statute under which the defendant was convicted is unconstitutional for two reasons: (1) That the law does not create the second offense a crime any greater than a first violation, and, therefore, because there is no crime created by the statute to be known as a second offense or violation, the second offense can be no greater than the first in point of punishment, and, as the first offense is a misdemeanor, a second conviction must likewise be, in the absence of any statute defining what shall constitute a second…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Graham v. West VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Brown v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1913
  3. People v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  4. State v. FindlingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  5. Kelly v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1886

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. McHenry v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1937
  2. Edwards v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1930
  3. Harrigill v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1950
  4. Williams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1934
  5. Hildebrandt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1922

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