Sies v. State
Decision Date | 29 August 1911 |
Citation | 117 P. 504,6 Okla.Crim. 142,1911 OK CR 269 |
Parties | SIES v. STATE. |
Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where the evidence is wholly circumstantial, and the facts and circumstances in evidence are of such a character as to fairly permit an inference consistent with innocence, it cannot be regarded as evidence sufficient to support a conviction.
The facts and circumstances proved must not only be consistent with and point to the guilt of the defendant, but they must be inconsistent with his innocence.
Appeal from Jefferson County Court; C. M. Bond, Judge.
Ward Sies was convicted of selling whisky illegally, and he appeals. Reversed.
J. H Harper, for plaintiff in error.
Smith C. Matson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Plaintiff in error was convicted of the crime of selling whisky to one Luther L. Busby, and sentenced to imprisonment for 30 days in jail and pay a fine of $50. Judgment was entered on October 15, 1909, from which judgment an appeal was taken by filing in this court on December 14th a petition in error with case-made.
The record shows the testimony of Luther Busby the first witness for the state as follows: He further testified that the defendant, Ward Sies, conducted a restaurant near witness' place of business, and that the defendant would come into his place to get change, and that witness frequently went into defendant's place to get change, and that Tolleson was somewhat intoxicated when he gave him the money.
Jake Tolleson testified that he gave Luther Busby a marked dollar bill to buy whisky, and Busby went and brought him back a pint of Sunny Brook whisky; that the next time he saw the marked dollar bill R. B. Pitts had it.
R. B Pitts and Hugh Treadwell testified that they marked a dollar bill and gave it to Jake Tolleson, and that a few hours after they gave the bill to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cole v. Trammell
...support of a defendant's guilt was circumstantial. See Easlick v. State, 90 P.3d 556, 558 (Okla.Crim.App.2004) (citing Sies v. State, 6 Okla.Crim. 142, 117 P. 504 (1911)). At that time, the OCCA described the test in the following manner: If the facts and circumstances are of such a charact......
-
Cole v. Trammell
...support of a defendant's guilt was circumstantial. See Easlick v. State, 90 P.3d 556, 558 (Okla.Crim.App.2004) (citing Sies v. State, 6 Okla.Crim. 142, 117 P. 504 (1911)). At that time, the OCCA described the test in the following manner: If the facts and circumstances are of such a charact......