From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sarten v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
Dec 11, 1920
196 P. 743 (Okla. Crim. App. 1920)

Summary

In First State Bank v. State, 27 N.M. 78, 196 P. 743, 744, we quoted with approval certain general principles of taxation stated by Cooley in his work on Taxation, among which are the following: "In the exercise of the power to tax, the purpose always is that a common burden shall be sustained by common contributions, regulated by some fixed general rule and apportioned by the law according to some uniform ratio of equality.

Summary of this case from In re Trigg

Opinion

No. A-3374

Opinion Filed December 11, 1920.

(Syllabus.)

1. APPEAL AND ERROR — Time for Appeal. In felony cases, the appeal must be taken within six months after the judgment was rendered.

2. SAME — Notice of Appeal and Summons in Error. Within the time allowed for taking the appeal, notices of appeal must be served upon the clerk of the trial court and the county attorney (as provided in section 5992, Rev. Laws 1910), or else summons in error must be served upon the Attorney General, or its issuance and service waived by said officer (as provided in section 5997, Rev. Laws 1910), before this court can acquire jurisdiction of an appeal in a criminal cause.

Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; Frank Mathews, Assigned Judge.

E.S. Sarten was convicted of the crime of maintaining a gambling nuisance and sentenced to pay a fine of $500, and he appeals. Appeal dismissed, and cause remanded with direction to enforce the judgment.

A.F. Decker, for plaintiff in error.

The Attorney General, for the State.


This is an attempted appeal from the district court of Oklahoma county, from a judgment rendered in said court on the 17th day of November, 1917, against defendant, E.S. Sarten, on a verdict finding defendant guilty of maintaining a gambling nuisance; the court assessing the punishment at a fine of $500.

Petition in error with transcript of the record attached, and a purported case-made (which had never been attested by the clerk and filed with the papers in the case in the office of the clerk of the trial court, as required by section 5242, Revised Laws 1910), were filed in this court on the 27th day of May, 1918. The conviction in this case was for a felony.

Section 5991, Revised Laws 1910, among other things, provides:

"In felony cases the appeal must be taken within six months after the judgment is rendered."

The judgment having been rendered on the 17th day of November, 1917, and the attempted appeal not having been lodged in this court until the 27th day of May, 1918, more than six months thereafter, this court never acquired jurisdiction thereof. Bethel v. State, 7 Okla. Cr. 36, 121 P. 792; Musick v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 608, 115 P. 377; Self v. State, 8 Okla. Cr. 70, 126 P. 582.

The record filed in this court also fails to disclose that plaintiff in error, within the time allowed for taking the appeal, served any notices of appeal either upon the clerk of the trial court or the county attorney of Oklahoma county, as provided in section 5992, Revised Laws 1910; nor does it appear that any summons in error was ever issued in behalf of plaintiff in error and served upon the Attorney General, or that there was any waiver of the issuance and service of a summons in error by such officer, as provided by section 5997, Revised Laws 1910.

Either the method provided in section 5992, supra, must be followed, or else summons in error must be served upon the Attorney General, or its issuance and service waived by said officer, as provided in section 5997, supra, before this court can acquire jurisdiction of an appeal in a criminal cause. Mann v. State, 17 Okla. Cr. 703, 186 P. 1098; Robinson v. State, 17 Okla. Cr. 717, 189 P. 763.

For the reasons stated, the appeal is dismissed, and the cause remanded to the trial court, with directions to enforce the judgment. Mandate forthwith.


Summaries of

Sarten v. State

Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
Dec 11, 1920
196 P. 743 (Okla. Crim. App. 1920)

In First State Bank v. State, 27 N.M. 78, 196 P. 743, 744, we quoted with approval certain general principles of taxation stated by Cooley in his work on Taxation, among which are the following: "In the exercise of the power to tax, the purpose always is that a common burden shall be sustained by common contributions, regulated by some fixed general rule and apportioned by the law according to some uniform ratio of equality.

Summary of this case from In re Trigg
Case details for

Sarten v. State

Case Details

Full title:E.S. SARTEN v. STATE

Court:Criminal Court of Appeals of Oklahoma

Date published: Dec 11, 1920

Citations

196 P. 743 (Okla. Crim. App. 1920)
196 P. 743

Citing Cases

In re Trigg

We there held that the court had jurisdiction to grant relief under the statute, only where the injustice was…

In re United Power Co. Taxes for 1937

The court has construed this section a number of times, before and since it was amended. In re Atchison, T.…