# Romano v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · December 19, 1995 · 66 O.B.A.J. 4015

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9583551

## Case

- **Full name:** John Joseph ROMANO, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** December 19, 1995
- **Citations:** 66 O.B.A.J. 4015; 909 P.2d 92; 1995 OK CR 74; 1995 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 81; 1995 WL 752153
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Lumpkin
- **Judges:** Strubhar, Johnson, Chapel, Lane, Lumpkin
- **Cited by:** 104 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/9583551

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that expert blood spatter lestimony that blood on certain clothing was consistent with wearer of clothing being person who stabbed victim was proper expert testimony, while subsequent testimony that, based upon expert witness's expertise, person who wore bloody clothin…

## Opinion text

LUMPKIN, Judge,
specially concurring:
I concur in the Court’s decision in this case and again urge the Court to adopt a unified “Spuehler-type” approach to evaluating both direct and circumstantial evidence. See White v. State, 900 P.2d 982, 993-95 (Okl.Cr. 1995) (Lumpkin, J., Specially Concurring). The parsing of the standard of review is no longer supported in the law. Id. And, when both standards are utilized to evaluate different parts of the evidence presented in the same trial, as in the present case, the parsing appears somewhat whimsical. The Court should seek to resolve this unsupported dichotomy. I compliment my colleague for an excellent, well-reasoned opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9583551. Public record. Not legal advice.