recognizing that determination of applicability of law to a given set of facts was inconsistent with purpose of State’s right to appeal upon a Reserved Question of Law
How later courts described this case
- recognizing that determination of applicability of law to a given set of facts was inconsistent with purpose of State’s right to appeal upon a Reserved Question of Law
- conducting plenary review of trial court's construction of statute to determine whether term "occupant" as used in 21 0.$.1991, § 1289.5 includes people other than home owner or continuous resident of premises
- interpreting language of § 1289.25
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CHAPEL, P.J.,
DISSENTING:
¶ 1 I dissent. Title 21 O.S.1991, § 1289.25, often referred to as the “Make My Day” Law, provides in Subsection A that it is intended to protect citizens “within their own home.” I would therefore limit the application of the Act. In view of Subsection A, I am of the opinion that the word “occupant” which appears in Subsections B and C refers only to residents of a dwelling and no others.