From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kinter v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
May 31, 1928
267 P. 680 (Okla. Crim. App. 1928)

Opinion

No. A-6403.

Opinion Filed May 31, 1928.

(Syllabus.)

Appeal and Error — Sufficiency of Evidence to Support Conviction. In a prosecution for assault with a dangerous weapon, evidence held sufficient to support conviction.

Appeal from District Court, Pottawatomie County; Hal Johnson, Judge.

L. Kinter was convicted of assault with a dangerous weapon, and he appeals. Affirmed.

W.L. Chapman, for plaintiff in error.

Edwin Dabney, Atty. Gen., and Smith C. Matson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


This appeal is from a judgment of conviction rendered upon the verdict of a jury finding the defendant, L. Kinter, guilty of assault with a dangerous weapon as charged in the information, and fixing his punishment at confinement in the state penitentiary for the term of one year. The judgment and sentence was rendered on April 10, 1926. An appeal by case-made was filed in this court October 7, 1926, but no brief has been filed.

The information, in substance, charged that in Pottawatomie county, on the 23d day of December, 1925, L. Kinter did feloniously, with intent to do bodily harm to one Milton Eaves, and without excusable or justifiable cause commit an assault upon the person of Milton Eaves with a dangerous weapon, to wit, a pistol.

Without the aid of oral argument or brief, we have carefully examined the record, and are satisfied that he has had a fair trial. Finding the evidence sufficient and no prejudicial error of law occurring at the trial, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

EDWARDS and DAVENPORT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kinter v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
May 31, 1928
267 P. 680 (Okla. Crim. App. 1928)
Case details for

Kinter v. State

Case Details

Full title:L. KINTER v. STATE

Court:Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma

Date published: May 31, 1928

Citations

267 P. 680 (Okla. Crim. App. 1928)
267 P. 680

Citing Cases

State v. Force

id county and state, the said L. C. Force, then and there being, did then and there willfully and unlawfully,…