Case law

Postelle v. State

267 P.3d 114 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 29, 2011

When the mistake was brought to his attention, he substituted the question prescribed by OUJI-CR(2d) 1-5 for qualifying capital case jurors. … She entered into an immunity agreement in August 2005 providing for her full cooperation with the State to prosecute these murders in exchange for immunity from prosecution for any crimes she could be held liable for stemming

Jones v. State

764 P.2d 914 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 1988

This type of problem can easily be avoided by attaching qualifiers to such statements such as “The evidence shows ...” or “I believe that the evidence clearly shows_” In the instant case, the abovementioned statements were … Specifically, he argues that the State failed to establish the essential element of sexual intercourse and that the testimony of the State’s witnesses was highly contradictory and thus could not have established his guilt

Davis v. State

413 P.2d 920 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 27, 1966

This paragraph is subsequently qualified by those following and explaining the general statement. Among those are the paragraphs quoted hereinbefore. This Court held in Leeth v. … The State would establish that the crime rate increased in Prague, Oklahoma, after Davis went to work over there.” The Judge responded, “I don’t believe that would be admissible.”

Padillow v. State

501 P.2d 837 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 27, 1972

Defendant’s first proposition in his. brief asserts the jury was qualified for the death penalty in violation of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Witherspoon v. … It is clearly within the discretion of the trial court how much latitude will be allowed for such rebuttal; and unless it clearly appears that such discretion is abused, this Court will not reverse the trial court decision

In Re Swaim

66 Okla. Crim. 30 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 7, 1939

hogs conducted in establishment 20-Q storage quarters located in building 2, establishment 20-Q as provided for in said license. … That the meaning of “post mortem examinations of hyper immune hogs conducted in establishment 20-Q storage quarters located in building 2, establishment 20-Q” is that Fidelity Laboratories, Inc., was authorized by said license

Alexander v. State

305 P.2d 572 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 1956

The accused’s evidence, though not entirely satisfactory and free from doubt in establishing her contention, could not simply be brushed off as of no consequence. … Van Pelt, who qualified as an expert. He not only understood the use of the drunkometer, but qualified as competent to give an opinion as to the effect of alcohol on the human body.

Newton v. State

14 Okla. Crim. 226 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 28, 1918

The latter provision would require also that the prosecution of said offense should be by the duly qualified officers of the state chosen for said purpose. … The statute clearly establishes a rule to make effective' the foregoing constitutional provisions.

Putman v. State

9 Okla. Crim. 535 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 7, 1913

The practical effect of the position of counsel for appellant would be-to grant immunity to the keepers of such houses, it matters not where located. … That fact being established, both upon principle and authority, we think the testimony competent.

Mills v. State

594 P.2d 374 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 26, 1979

Patricia Armstrong, having been granted immunity from prosecution, basically corroborated the testimony of Emily Grant. … State, Okl.Cr., 546 P.2d 1336 (1976), where the court said: “ * * * Clearly, the informant was present only to detect whether or not the defendant was selling heroin.

Hughes v. State

529 P.2d 510 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 1974

We find it unnecessary to consider the question of whether the informant’s tip was enough to establish probable cause to arrest, in view of the fact that an arrest had not yet taken place at the time the revolver was seized … Persons who are not qualified to serve as jurors are: ****** 5. Licensed attorneys engaged in the practice of law . . .” Whether or not Mr.

Ex Parte Justus

3 Okla. Crim. 111 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 25, 1909

In other words, a constitutional immunity of the defendant was violated by the second trial and judgment. … Therefore, when any constitutional right or immunity of a,person is violated, the judgment of the court is void.”

Nance v. State

41 Okla. Crim. 379 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 2, 1929

Willett as an appointed and qualified county attorney. … The publication of the matter in question is clearly proven, a copy of the Fish Hook, of the date named in the information, was in evidence before the jury, and it is conclusively established that the publication was libelous

KMC v. State

221 P.3d 735 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 29, 2009

The role of this Court is to interpret and reconcile those statutes under the established rules of construction and not cherry pick some rules and disregard others. … Specifically, when the Legislature amended § 7306-2.9 to set the 18 year five month age limit, it obviously was defining a class of otherwise lawfully eligible older youth, an option it clearly reserved to itself in § 7306

Roney v. State

62 O.B.A.J. 3291 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 23, 1991

Once the car was parked, the guns inside the car, which lead to the further inquiry by the officers, were clearly visible from outside the car. … The Court held that the plain view exception was sufficiently limited in its employment by the other two qualifiers, that the object be in plain view and that its relation to criminal activity be immediately apparent, along

Chasteen v. State

551 P.2d 1171 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 1976

At this point, the officer gave his qualifications as a narcotics officer based on his experience, in an attempt to qualify him as an expert in the field of narcotics and marijuana identification. … Clearly, this assignment of error is without merit.

Pickens v. State

450 P.2d 837 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 5, 1969

Shortly thereafter, the defendant left and went to the other side of the establishment, the side where food was served. When the defendant returned, Quinn was standing at the jukebox with French. … State, Okl.Cr.App., 369 P.2d 187 , as follows: This section clearly contemplates that instructions to juries in criminal cases should be settled before they are read to the jury, and that, if counsel have any instructions

Dumas v. State

19 Okla. Crim. 413 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 18, 1921

It has been repeatedly held by this court : “On appeal the burden is upon the appellant to establish both error and prejudice resulting therefrom.” Cardwell v. State (No. … It is contended that the record discloses that such evidence was not a free and voluntary confession on the part of defendant, but was induced by reason of promises and immunity held out to him.

McLeod v. State

725 P.2d 877 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1986

The inability to safely drive is the definitional standard used by Oklahoma courts to establish the level of intoxication a person must reach in order to qualify as being “under the influence.” … In addition, the trial judge clearly and correctly instructed the jury as to the law on this element.

Smith v. State

144 P.3d 159 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 28, 2006

However, if the testimony of a qualified expert was presented to the jury, Appellant might have been acquitted. … This *169 clearly establishes a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. ¶ 46 Therefore, Appellant’s conviction should be reversed and this

Myers v. State

130 P.3d 262 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2005

And there was evidence that Myers negotiated his own grant of immunity with a sheriff in Kansas for a crime he committed there. … The Random House Unabridged Dictionary defines “known” as perceived or understood as fact or truth; apprehended clearly and with certainty. See “know” & “known” Random House Dictionary (2nd ed.1997).