Case ID: okla-crim_6/html/0720-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WALTER FAUCETT and ROBERT GILLIAM v. STATE.
    No. A-1166.
    Opinion Filed January 17, 1912.
    Appeal from Tulsa County Court; N. J. Gubser, Judge.
    Walter Faucett and Robert Gilliam were convicted of violating the prohibitory law, and appeal.
    Beversed and remanded.
    Davidson & Williams, for plaintiffs in error.
    Smith C. Matson and E, G. Spilman, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
   PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs in error were convicted in the county court of Tulsa county, at the January, 1911, term, of violating the prohibitory law, and Walter Faueett’s punishment fixed at a fine of three hundred dollars and thirty days’ imprisonment in the county' jail, and Bobert Gilliam’s punishment fixed at a fine of fifty dollars and thirty days’ confinement in the county jail. Following the doctrine laid down by this court in the cases of Barr v. State, infra, 115 Pac. 1009; Harper v. State, infra, 115 Pac. 1009, and McDaniel v. State, infra, 115 Pac. 1010, we think the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to cause the county attorney to file a proper information, and try the ease anew. It is so ordered.