# Thomas v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 29, 1991 · 811 P.2d 1337

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9530712

## Case

- **Full name:** Derrell Lynn THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** May 29, 1991
- **Citations:** 811 P.2d 1337; 1991 WL 78886
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Parks
- **Judges:** Lane, Johnson, Parks, Lumpkin, Brett
- **Cited by:** 47 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9530712

## Opinion text

PARKS, Judge,
specially concurring:
For the reasons stated in my separate opinion in Fox v. State, 779 P.2d 562, 579 (Okl.Cr.1989), I continue to view the so-called “anti-sympathy” instruction in the second stage of trial unnecessary and confusing to the jury where mitigating evidence has been introduced. However, I must apply the majority’s analysis as a matter of stare decisis. I also reiterate my opinion that the “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel” aggravating circumstance is unconstitutionally vague both on its face and as applied. See Foster v. State, 779 P.2d 591, 594 (Okl.Cr.1989) (Parks, P.J., specially concurring). As a matter of stare decisis, however, I yield to the “torture or serious abuse” standard adopted in Stouf-fer. Applying this standard, I agree that the evidence presented concerning the instant murder satisfied this circumstance *1353 and that the sentence of death should be affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9530712. Public record. Not legal advice.