Stripped of all legal verbiage, the information charged that on the 8th day of March, 1949, the defendant effected the death of his daughter Mary Frances Mott, age six years, by cutting her throat with a twelve-inch butcher knife.Ĭonsidering the evidence on behalf of the state, we find: *147 While the record contains nearly 700 pages, and most of the exhaustive briefs of defendant are devoted to reviewing and quoting the evidence, we find no material conflict in the same, so far as concerns the details of the murder and the fact that defendant was the murderer. '(6) That the judgment is contrary to the evidence.' '(5) That the judgment is contrary to the law. '(4) That the court erred in refusing to sustain the demurrer of defendant at the close of all the evidence. '(3) That the court erred in denying defendant's demurrer to the evidence of the State '(2) The court erred in refusing to sustain defendant's motion to quash the jury panel '(1) That the court erred in refusing the defendant his requested continuance of the case

The plaintiff in error will hereinafter be referred to as defendant.Ĭounsel for reversal urges six specifications of error, and being: Appeal has been duly perfected to this court, and execution stayed pending outcome of the appeal. Mott, was charged by information filed in the district court of Tulsa county with the crime of murder, was tried to a jury, convicted, and his punishment was by the jury fixed at death, and thereafter judgment was by the trial court entered accordingly. Bland and John Harris, Fort Smith, Ark., amici curiae.

Miss Moss by M. Mott