Case law

Pierce v. State

371 P.2d 924 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 29, 1961

It was contended he was not qualified by admission to practice medicine in Oklahoma. That is not an essential to testimonial expertness. In Bingham v. … It is clearly apparent that this matter had already been covered in the state’s case in chief. The two cases relied on by defendant in this regard lay down the rule as follows : Corliss v.

Application of Mennelli

332 P.2d 38 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 5, 1958

Liebler, a qualified private attorney of his own choice who is also one of the Judges of the Municipal Court of the City of Tulsa. … Moreover, it is alleged the record would reveal several prior felony convictions which were established by competent proof.

Gordon v. State

649 P.2d 807 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 10, 1982

I believe, however, that this general rule must be qualified. 1 If the cause of the victim’s death is solely attributable to grossly improper medical treatment and not at all attributable to the original wound inflicted by … However, the record clearly establishes that the appellant did inflict life threatening wounds which directly gave rise to perforations in the victim’s bladder and extensive damage to the small intestines.

State Ex Rel. Prater v. District Court of Oklahoma County

188 P.3d 1281 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 2008

The Department of Corrections (D.0.C.) is charged with establishing and carrying out the provisions of the D.S.P.Y.A. … The statutory language of section 996.1 clearly states that the date of charging an offense is the controlling date for determining if an individual qualifies for D.S.P.Y.A. sentencing, not the date the individual is convicted

Cunningham v. State

600 P.2d 337 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 5, 1979

We take this statement to mean that where a statute is intended to protect a person’s immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures by providing that a search warrant shall only issue upon a determination by an impartial … magistrate that probable cause exists, this Court will not give the statute a technical construction establishing requisites unrelated to the purpose of the statute.

Vickers v. United States

1 Okla. Crim. 452 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 19, 1908

A defendant should be clearly informed in the indictment of the exact and full charge made against him. … It seems that the court did not instruct the jury as to their right to return a qualified verdict.

Ex Parte Higgs

97 Okla. Crim. 338 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1953

A later clause or provision may qualify an earlier one, and the converse is equally true. Ex parte Hunnicutt, 7 Okla. Cr. 213 , 123 P. 179 . … Moreover it clearly appears, that in the act as originally passed, there is no ambiguity or room for confusion. Its limitation of scope and meaning is perfectly clear.

Duckworth v. State

309 P.2d 1103 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 14, 1957

that defendant declined to consent to the taking away of the shoes which he was wearing, for the purpose of comparing them with tracks supposed to have been made by him is inadmissible under the constitutional guaranty of immunity … The court then proceeded to clearly set out the distinction between evidence by word of mouth, and physical or real evidence. All this we attempted in some detail to set out in the recent case of Alexander v.

Quinn v. State

55 Okla. Crim. 116 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1933

This principle has been applied in the following instances: Where defendant’s guilt was clearly established by the evidence; where the verdict shows that the improper remarks had no effect; where no other verdict could have … Defendant’s guilt was clearly established by the evidence and no' other verdict than the one found could honestly have been returned. The remarks complained of were not on a material point or issue in the case.

Byers v. State

78 Okla. Crim. 267 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 22, 1944

One of the witnesses for the state qualified as a handwriting expert and he stated that it was his opinion that the name J. P. … However, since this evidence was merely cumulative and concerned a matter which had been clearly established, we cannot see how the defendant has been prejudiced by its admission.

Hammonds v. State

366 P.2d 111 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 20, 1961

The evidence was conflicting, but the record clearly supports the jury’s finding of defendant’s guilt under the allegations of the information. … The State established that the defendant Hammonds smelled strongly of moonshine whiskey after the collision, and even for several hours thereafter.

Luker v. State

552 P.2d 715 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 15, 1976

In the present case, the evidence presented by the State clearly established that the closed tavern was entered without authority, and both the juke box and cigarette vending machine within the building were forcibly opened … In any event, the trial court clearly exceeded its authority in modifying the sentence assessed by the jury. In Bean v.

Leftwich v. Alcorn

262 P.3d 770 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 13, 2011

Const. .... provides at least as much protection as the immunity granted by the comparable provisions of the Federal Constitution"); Howard, 1977 OK 68 , ¶¶ 5-16, 570 P.2d 42, 43-47 (construing Oklahoma's Article V, § 22 … Thus, the Constitution and statutes of this State have clearly established this Court as the court of last resort in criminal cases. .

Riggle v. State

585 P.2d 1382 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 31, 1978

Therefore, although admission of the copy was clearly error, such error was harmless since the evidence was merely cumulative. … State, 9 Okl.Cr. 382 , 132 P. 359 (1913), which states: “A witness may be qualified to testify as an expert by studying without practice or by practice without studying; and where a witness has qualified as an expert, based

State v. Harbert

758 P.2d 826 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 15, 1988

Whether a fetus can be a “person” to qualify as a victim in the assault and battery statute has never been decided by this Court. … Since there is a doubt, the well-established rule in Oklahoma was articulated by Judge Bussey in State v.

Ex Parte Hanners

28 Okla. Crim. 203 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 1924

No response or answer was made' to said rule until the 27th day of October, 1924, when respondent filed an answer as follows: “That he is the qualified and acting sheriff of Jackson county, Okla., and that on the 5th day … The writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to perform the office of a writ of error on appeal, but should be limited to cases in which the judgment and sentence of the court attacked is clearly void.

Hamill v. Powers

164 P.3d 1083 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 2007

T10 The State apparently intends to use its expert to establish that the complainant was not mentally capable of consenting to sexual relations. … Counsel submitted to the district court the curric- « ulum vitae of a psychologist that counsel felt was qualified to conduct the evaluation he has requested.

Parsons v. State

740 P.2d 167 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 20, 1987

We are of the opinion that the evidence of which the appellant complains was clearly so connected with the principal offense that it was part of the entire transaction. Bruner v. … An examination of the record reveals that the judge stated that he would allow counsel to present whatever evidence he needed to establish his defense.

Miller v. State

3 Okla. Crim. 374 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 13, 1910

We believe that this instruction is clearly erroneous and prejudicial to the rights of the defendant, even though instructions 2, 3, 4, and 5 correctly state the law. … The aforesaid instruction No. 6 is calculated to convey to the minds of the jury an erroneous impression, in that it may be construed as varying the rule of law, and to qualify its meaning and scope and the manifest design

Application of Smith

351 P.2d 1076 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 3, 1960

If such were true, to qualify as an elector one would have to be 22 years of age. Such interpretation would amend the clear intent of the Statute by unusual interpretation. … The cases are clearly distinguishable on the basis as herein before indicated.