“[E]ven though not raised on direct appeal, issues of subject matter jurisdiction are never waived and can therefore be raised on a collateral appeal.”
How later courts described this case
- “[E]ven though not raised on direct appeal, issues of subject matter jurisdiction are never waived and can therefore be raised on a collateral appeal.”
- a “kitchen sink” reference is insufficient to preserve an issue for post-conviction appeal
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CHAPEL, Presiding Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the Court’s decision denying Wallace’s Application. Traditionally in Oklahoma, on post-conviction review, a defendant has received the benefit of intervening changes in the law. The revised post-conviction statute changed that general rule. 9 Moreover, this Court has recently determined that the issue of the appropriate standard for determination of competency under Cooper v. Oklahoma 10 is not a new rule of constitutional law. 11 Therefore procedural bars may apply to these claims on post-eonviction. Our resolution of Wallace’s Proposition V acutely illustrates the harsh result which may occur when the principle of finality of judgment is applied. However, our new post-conviction statute dictates the strict application of that principle.
. 22 O.S.Supp.1995, § 1089(D)(9)(a) & (b).
. - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1373 , 134 L.Ed.2d 498 (1996).
. Walker v. State, 933 P.2d. 327 , 339 — 41 (1997).