Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 983 P.2d 474
  • 1998 OK CR 77
  • 1998 WL 917033
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed
Dec 31, 1998
Status
Published
Author
Chapel
On the bench
Lane, Chapel, Strubhar, Lumpkin, Johnson
Cited by
14 cases

The opinion

CHAPEL, P.J.,

dissenting.

¶ 1 I would reverse and remand this case for a new trial as I find merit in Brown’s first proposition of error. The majority finds error but resolves the error by judging it harmless. In so doing, the majority winks at a very serious constitutional violation. The majority justifies its action by noting that evidence, other than that which ought to have been excluded, proves Brown was guilty. My own view is that in the case of serious constitutional errors, this court should reverse and require the State to do it right. If, as the majority argues, the evidence was otherwise sufficient, the outcome will be the same. But this Court by its action would have upheld the constitution. Winking at serious. constitutional errors, while expedient, degrades and demeans our rights.

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.