Case ID: okla-crim_19/html/0213-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DOYLE, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOE COLLINS HODGES v. STATE.
    No. A-3555.
    Opinion Filed June 16, 1921.
    (198 Pac. 622.)
    (Syllabus.)
    Appeal and Error — Dismissal — Acceptance of Parole. When .an appeal from a judgment of conviction is pending in this court, and the appellant is granted a parole and accepts , the same, and the fact that a parole has been granted and- accepted is brought to the attention of the' court, the appeal will ’be-dismissed as having been abandoned.
    Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma Couuty; Geo. W. Clark, Judge.
    
      Joe Collins Hodges was convicted of larceny of an auto-anobile, and lie appeals.
    Appeal dismissed, and cause remanded.
    Pruiett, Sniggs & Patterson, for plaintiff in error.
    The Attorney General and W. C. Hall, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
   DOYLE, P. J.

On May 22, 1918, an information was filed in the district court of Oklahoma county, charging appellant, Joe Collins Hodges, alias Joe Collins, and Alford Lester A’Day, alias Alford Walters, with the larceny of one 1918 .model, five-passenger Ford automobile, of the value of $501, 'the personal property of the Oklahoma Farm Mortgage Com-jpany, a private corporation.

Upon their trial appellant, Joe Collins Hodges, was found "guilty and his punishment fixed at imprisonment in the penitentiary for the term of two years and six months. From the judgment rendered November 30, 1918, upon such conviction, an appeal was taken by filing in this court on May 28, 1919, a petition in error, to which was attached a transcript •of the record proper.

The appellant is not represented by counsel in this court, and no brief in support of the assignments of error has been filed. When the case was called for final submission it was suggested that pending the determination of the appeal, •on December 24, 1920, the Governor had granted a pardon or parole to appellant, which was by him accepted, and that the appeal had been abandoned.

It has been uniformly held by this court that when an ••appeal from a judgment of conviction is pending, and the appellant applies for a pardon or parole, and the same is granted and accepted by the appellant, and the fact that the same has ’-been granted and accepted is brought to the attention of this court, the appeal will be dismissed as having been abandoned..

The appeal herein is therefore dismissed, and the cause remanded to the trial court.

MATSON and BESSEY, JJ., concur.