# Revilla v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · April 22, 1994 · 65 O.B.A.J. 1491

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9792756

## Case

- **Full name:** Daniel Juan REVILLA, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** April 22, 1994
- **Citations:** 65 O.B.A.J. 1491; 877 P.2d 1143; 1994 OK CR 24; 1994 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 28; 1994 WL 143780
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Lane
- **Judges:** Lumpkin, Johnson, Chapel, Lane
- **Cited by:** 61 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/9792756

## Opinion text

LANE, Judge,
dissenting.
I dissent to the opinion of the majority on the issue of the trial court’s refusal to give OUJI-CR-727 as a requested instruction. I believe that any time there is sufficient evidence to cause the trial judge to give instructions on an affirmative defense an instruction must be given properly setting out the bur *1157 den of proof. See, i.e., Bechtel v. State, 840 P.2d 1 (Okl.Cr.1992) (instruction necessary for defense of self defense) and Lee v. State, 655 P.2d 1046 (Okl.Cr.1982) (instruction necessary for defense of entrapment). Here, the appellant raised the defense of excusable homicide by reason of accident. The trial court instructed on this defense and gave all of the uniform instructions but number 727, the instruction which sets out the burden of proof.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9792756. Public record. Not legal advice.