Case ID: okla-crim_50/html/0449-01.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

J. A. CALDWELL v. STATE.
    No. A-7853.
    Opinion Filed May 9, 1931.
    (299 Pac. 1083.)
    Percy Powers, for plaintiff in error.
    The Attorney General, for the State.
   PER CURIAM.

An examination of the record discloses that the state offered no witness who claimed to have seen defendant with the whisky, or to having seen him transport it, nor does the evidence of the state show any definite evidence of the whisky being transported from one place to another.

Under the rule announced in Smith v. State, 34 Okla. Cr. 293, 246 Pac. 261; Brown v. State, 18 Okla. Cr. 509, 196 Pac. 967; Aycock v. State, 32 Okla. Cr. 302, 240 Pac. 1081; Jones v. State, 39 Okla. Cr. 195, 264 Pac. 638; and Slayton v. State, 45 Okla. Cr. 283, 283 Pac. 258 — the evidence of the state was wholly insufficient to support the verdict of the jury.

For the reasons stated, the cause is reversed.