Opinion

Smith v. State

  • 46 P.3d 136
  • 2002 OK CR 2
  • 2002 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 31
  • 2002 WL 13807
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed
Jan 7, 2002
Status
Published
Author
Chapel
On the bench
Johnson, Viee-Presiding, Lumpkin, Strubhar, Lile, Chapel
Cited by
11 cases

The opinion

CHAPEL, Judge,

concurs in part/dissents in part:

T1 I concur in the majority's discussion and conclusion as to the applicability of the collateral estoppel doctrine to criminal proceedings where the issue has been finally determined in a civil proceeding. I cannot agree, however, with the majority's application of the doctrine to the facts in this case. To reach the conclusion the majority has reached, one must conclude that a child could be the victim of sexual abuse in a manner that is not "heinous or shocking" or that did not cause "severe harm or injury." That is not a conclusion I am prepared to make. I therefore dissent to the decision to affirm the conviction and sentence in this case.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.