Dunham v State

Annotate this Case

Dunham v State
1945 OK CR 97
162 P.2d 332
81 Okl.Cr. 205
Decided: 10/03/1945
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

(Syllabus.)

1. Prostitution-Statutory Provision.

1. Tit. 21 O. S. Supp. 1943 § 1028, provides:

"It shall be unlawful in the State of Oklahoma: * * *

"(c) To offer, or to offer to secure, another for the purpose of prostitution, or for any other lewd or indecent act:

2. Same--Conviction not Sustained by Evidence. Record examined, and evidence found to be insufficient to support conviction of defendant under terms of statute. 21 O. S. Supp. 1943 § 1028.

Appeal from County Court, Garfield County; Paul Edwards, Judge.

Harry Dunham was convicted of the crime of "making an offer to one Arlo Martin to secure another for the purpose of prostitution with said Arlo Martin", and he appeals. Reversed.

Harry C. Kirkendall, of Enid, for plaintiff in error.

Randell S. Cobb, Atty. Gen., Jess L. Pullen, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Harry McKeever, Co. Atty. of Enid, for defendant in error.

BAREFOOT, P. J. Defendant, Harry Dunham, was charged in the county court of Garfield county with the crime of unlawfully "making an offer to one Arlo Martin to secure another for the purpose of prostitution with the said Arlo Martin." He was tried, convicted and sentenced to serve a term of four months in the county jail and pay costs amounting to $37.25, and has appealed.

A number of assignments of error are made, but we consider it unnecessary to refer to all of them.

The statute under which defendant was charged is 21 O. S. Supp. 1943 § 1028, and is as follows:

Page 206

"It shall be unlawful in the State of Oklahoma:

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.