Butler v. State
| Decision Date | 19 January 1944 |
| Docket Number | A-10192. |
| Citation | 145 P.2d 215,78 Okla.Crim. 133 |
| Parties | BUTLER v. STATE. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Where an appeal is taken to this court and no appearance is made when the case is assigned for oral argument, and no briefs are filed, the record will be examined and if no fundamental error appears the judgment will be affirmed.
2. An information may be amended in matters of either form or substance when it can be done without prejudice to the substantial rights of the accused. No amendment shall cause any delay in the trial unless for good cause shown by affidavit.
3. Where there is substantial evidence to support verdict, the judgment of conviction will not be reversed on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence merely because evidence is conflicting.
4. In a prosecution for larceny of domestic animals, evidence examined and held sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment of conviction, and that no prejudicial error was committed on the trial.
Appeal from District Court, McCurtain County; Geo. R. Childers Judge.
Ivory Butler was convicted of larceny of domestic animals, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
C. D Wilkinson, of Idabel, for plaintiff in error.
Randell S. Cobb, Atty. Gen., and Ed. Shipp, Co. Atty., of Idabel, for defendant in error.
Defendant Ivory Butler, was charged in the District Court of McCurtain County with the crime of larceny of domestic animals; was tried, convicted, sentenced to serve two years in the State Penitentiary, and has appealed.
When this case was assigned for oral argument, no one appeared for the defendant, and no brief has been filed in his behalf.
When this case was called for trial, the County Attorney was granted permission to amend the information by changing the name of the party from whom the yearling was alleged to have been stolen from W. R. Hewett to L. M. Mackey.
Title 22 O.S.A.1941 § 304, provides: "An information may be amended in matter of substance or form at any time before the defendant pleads, without leave, and may be amended after plea on order of the court where the same can be done without material prejudice to the right of the defendant; no amendment shall cause delay of the trial, unless for good cause shown by affidavit."
In construing this statute, we have often held that an information may be amended in matters of either form or substance when it can be done without prejudice to the rights of the accused. Herren v. State, 72 Okl.Cr. 254, 115 P.2d 258; Ward v. State, 34 Okl.Cr. 296, 246 P. 664; Hammons v. State, 47 Okl.Cr. 297, 298 P. 1076; Little v. State, 21 Okl.Cr. 1, 204 P. 305.
In the following cases it has been held that the name of the owner...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
...the judgment and sentence. LeFavour v. State, 77 Okl.Cr. 383, 142 P.2d 132; Grooms v. State, 77 Okl.Cr. 448, 142 P.2d 862; Butler v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 145 P.2d 215; Salisbury v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 156 P.2d We have carefully examined the record with reference to the assignment of error th......
-
Bozarth v. State
... ... there [81 Okla.Crim. 127] is a conflict in the evidence. The ... jury is in much better position to pass upon the testimony ... where there is a conflict. It is only when the evidence is ... insufficient to sustain the judgment and sentence that the ... same will be set aside. Butler v. State, Okl.Cr., ... 145 P.2d 215; Wehr v. State, Okl.Cr., 155 P.2d 731; ... Graham v. State, Okl.Cr., 157 P.2d 758 ... The ... evidence of the State was sufficient to justify the ... ...
- Stone v. Stone
-
Ex parte Conway
... ... proceeding in the matter of the petition of Henry W. Conway ... for a writ of habeas corpus to secure petitioner's ... release from the state penitentiary. On demurrer by state to ... petition ... Demurrer ... sustained and petition dismissed ... the defendant to the information was overruled and before the ... case proceeded to trial. In Butler v. State, 78 ... Okl.Cr. 133, 145 P.2d 215, 216, this court said: ... [84 ... Okla.Crim. 123] 'We have often held that an ... ...