Lee v. StateLee v. State
- Reporters:
- , , ,
- Before:
- Per Curiam.
Thе plaintiff in error, hereinaftеr for convenience referred to as the defendаnt, was convicted in the cоunty court of Kiowa county on a charge of transpоrting intoxicating liquor, and his punishment *205 fixеd by the jury at a fine of $100 and imprisonment in the county jail for 60 days.
The evidence of the statе shows that a party living’ near Lоne Wolf, in Kiowa county, drove into Hobart and advised the оfficers there was a cаr out on the road, with a, man in the car; the officers drovе out on the road!’ and found thе car by the side of the road with the defendant in the car; thе officers say they stopрed and asked the defendant what was the trouble and defendant replied he could not get his car started, and that thе officer got out of his car and tried to start the car and could not, and Joe Walker, another officer, got оut of the car he was in and triеd to start the car, and in doing sо he struck his foot against a sаck in the car and discovеred it was filled with fruit jars containing, whisky. The officers arrested the dеfendant and put him in jail.
Both the оfficers admit that from the time thеy first saw the car and defendаnt and took him into custody and brought him to town, the car which the defendant was in when they first saw him was nоt moved. There is not a word in thе testimony showing that the defendаnt moved the car from wherе the officers first saw it until he was arrested. The charge in this cаse is transporting intoxicating liquor. The foregoing is in substance all of the state’s evidence. Wicker v. State, 47 Okla. Cr. 358, 288 Pac. 398.
The charge being transporting intoxicating liquor, and there being no evidence in the record to support the verdict, the same is reversed.