Summary
holding that the statutory list of types of pleas to an indictment was exclusive; analogizing to the rule in State v. Whitney, supra, that statutory grounds for setting aside an indictment were exclusive
Summary of this case from State v. StoutOpinion
No. A-1166.
Opinion Filed January 17, 1912.
Appeal from Tulsa County Court; N.J. Gubser, Judge.
Walter Faucett and Robert Gilliam were convicted of violating the prohibitory law, and appeal. Reversed and remanded.
Davidson Williams, for plaintiffs in error.
Smith C. Matson and E.G. Spilman, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
Plaintiffs in error were convicted in the county court of Tulsa county, at the January, 1911, term, of violating the prohibitory law, and Walter Faucett's punishment fixed at a fine of three hundred dollars and thirty days' imprisonment in the county jail, and Robert Gilliam's punishment fixed at a fine of fifty dollars and thirty days' confinement in the county jail. Following the doctrine laid down by this court in the cases of Barr v. State, infra, 115 P. 1009; Harper v. State, infra, 115 P. 1009, and McDaniel v. State, infra, 115 P. 1010, we think the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to cause the county attorney to file a proper information, and try the case anew. It is so ordered.