Summary
In State v. Handlin, 100 Ark. 175, 139 S.W. 1112, an inheritance tax law was upheld on the ground that inheritance taxes are not laid upon property, but upon the privilege or right of succession thereto, and are not subject to the same tests with respect to equality and uniformity under 5, art. 16, of the Constitution as taxes levied upon property.
Summary of this case from Baker v. HillOpinion
No. 18093.
Delivered April 1, 1936.
Burglary — Affirmance.
Where defendant entered plea of guilty after being duly warned, and no evidence was introduced in his behalf, and the facts fully justified the verdict and judgment, and all matters of procedure appeared to have been perfectly regular, conviction for burglary would be affirmed.
Appeal from the District Court of Comanche County. Tried below before the Hon. R. B. Cross, Judge.
Appeal from conviction for burglary; penalty, confinement in penitentiary for five years.
Affirmed.
The opinion states the case.
George W. Mills, of Waco, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.
Conviction for burglary; punishment, five years in the penitentiary.
Appellant entered his plea of guilty after being duly warned, and no evidence was introduced in his behalf. The facts fully justified the verdict and judgment, and all matters of procedure appear to have been perfectly regular.
We find in the record evidence of an attempt by appellant after his conviction to attack the indictment by way of habeas corpus. Our views in this regard are fully presented in our opinion in cause No. 18094, Gribble v. State, this day handed down. (Page 152 of this volume).
(See Haile v. State under date June 24, 1936).
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
MORROW, P. J., absent.