Opinion

Bush v. State

  • 280 P.3d 337
  • 2012 OK CR 9
  • 2012 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 7
  • 2012 WL 2335896
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed
Jun 19, 2012
Status
Published
Author
Smith
On the bench
Johnson, Lewis, Lumpkin, Smith
Cited by
11 cases

The opinion

SMITH, J.,

Concurring in Result.

T1 I concur in the Court's decision to affirm the convictions in this case. However, I dissent to the Court's treatment of the continuing threat aggravating cireumstance. The trial court ruled that the testimony of the "jail house snitch," Jackie Nash, was inadmissible and sustained Bush's motion to bar the witness's testimony because no notice was given to Bush regarding this evidence in aggravation. Despite this ruling, the trial court allowed the State to make an offer of proof regarding the substance of Nash's testimony. This offer of proof was extremely prejudicial and contained evidence that was not known to the Court through any other witness or document. As pointed out by Bush, the State had no appeal of this ruling of the Court and the ruling did not depend on the content of the testimony, hence there was no reason for the court to allow this very extensive and prejudicial offer of proof. The trial court enjoys the presumption that only competent and admissible evidence was considered, but it is difficult to believe that this evidence could be ignored. I cannot find that there is no reasonable probability that *354 the evidence did not impact the trial court's decision to sentence Bush to death.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.