Opinion

Carolina v. State

  • 63 O.B.A.J. 2940
  • 839 P.2d 663
  • 1992 OK CR 65
  • 1992 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 78
  • 1992 WL 253101
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed
Oct 5, 1992
Status
Published
Author
Lumpkin
On the bench
Brett, Parks, Lumpkin, Johnson
Cited by
5 cases

holding evidence defendant took possession of drugs and attempted to hide them sufficient

How later courts described this case

  • holding evidence defendant took possession of drugs and attempted to hide them sufficient

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

LUMPKIN, Vice Presiding Judge,

concurring in results:

I concur in the results reached by the Court in this case. However, as Judge Johnson has pointed out, the issue in this case is impeachment for untruthfulness under 12 O.S.1981, § 2608(B)(1), rather than bias. The Court presents an artful analysis of bias evidence as it relates to prior arrests but we must not be distracted from the facts of the case and the provisions of the Oklahoma Evidence Code. The witness had previously testified regarding not wanting drugs around his house, therefore, the subsequent arrest was valid impeachment evidence. The State asked the question regarding the prior arrest and the witness admitted it. Extrinsic evidence was not involved and the State complied with Section 2608. I therefore concur in the results reached by the Court.

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.