examining “evidence outside the pictures themselves” to determine whether the defendant had possessed the pictures for the purpose of his own sexual stimulation
How later courts described this case
- examining “evidence outside the pictures themselves” to determine whether the defendant had possessed the pictures for the purpose of his own sexual stimulation
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BRETT, Judge,
specially concurring:
I agree that appellant’s conviction and sentence should be affirmed, however, I would add that as to appellant’s fifth assignment of error, where he contends that the trial court should have given instructions on a lesser included offense, that this error is not waived. If a lesser included offense is supported by the evidence, then the trial court must give the instructions on that offense whether the defendant requests them or not. Penny v. State, 765 P.2d 797 (Okl.Cr.1988). Nevertheless, I agree with the majority that the evidence in this case did not support a lesser included offense.