# Perry v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · April 7, 1995 · 66 O.B.A.J. 1350

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9617321

## Case

- **Full name:** Randy Scott PERRY, Appellant, v. the STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** April 7, 1995
- **Citations:** 66 O.B.A.J. 1350; 893 P.2d 521; 1995 OK CR 20; 1995 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 26; 1995 WL 150680
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Johnson
- **Judges:** Chapel, Lumpkin, Lane, Strubhar, Johnson
- **Cited by:** 45 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/9617321

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding insufficient evidence to support the two aggravating circumstances found and modifying to life imprisonment without parole

## Opinion text

JOHNSON, Presiding Judge,
concurs in part/dissents in part:
I concur with the Court in affirming the judgment and the jury verdict in this case as to guilt. I would dissent from the Court’s finding to modify to life without parole and, further, I would affirm the death sentence herein and affirm both aggravators.
The facts in this ease are fairly clear. I would find circumstantial evidence to find the sufficiency of both aggravators. It would appear from the evidence that an abduction occurred between 9:45 and 10:00 p.m. on March 27, 1990. From other physical evidence, again, circumstances would warrant a jury finding that there was sufficient evidence to warrant heinous, atrocious and cruel as an aggravator. Appellant did not raise this issue, the issue that was raised had to do with the aggravator being inconsistently applied. Regardless, I would find that there was sufficient evidence to substantiate the aggravator.
This Court has consistently held in the past that evidence of the killing for which the defendant has been convicted can be enough to justify the continuing threat aggravator. The callous nature with which the deceased was killed, the way the body was dumped into the creek, the evidence of how appellant admitted the killing, are a basis for finding the aggravator. Therefore, based upon the past rulings of this Court and the evidence in this case, I would uphold the aggravator and the death sentence. Workman v. State, 824 P.2d 378, 383-84 (Okl.Cr.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 258 , 121 L.Ed.2d 189 (1992).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9617321. Public record. Not legal advice.