Case law

Saunders v. State

4 Okla. Crim. 264 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1910

Both are clearly admissible.” … And the statements that threats are admissible to mitigate the offense and to show the purpose and motives of the deceased in making the attack, are not true except in a very qualified sense.

Plantz v. State

65 O.B.A.J. 1968 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 20, 1994

This two part test for establishing mutually antagonistic defenses requires a defendant to both (1) exculpate himself and (2) inculpate a co-defendant. … The serious physical abuse suffered by the decedent and the attitude of the Appellant, clearly support the jury’s finding that the murder was “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel”.

Warner v. State

144 P.3d 838 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2006

The injuries and blood on the victim’s rectum were clearly visible when she was examined at the hospital emergency room. … Appellant has failed to establish counsel’s ineffectiveness in this instance.

REECE v. STATE

2025 OK CR 10 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 16, 2025

. ¶49 This Court is tasked with determining whether the trial court's view of the facts was clearly erroneous. … He clearly tells him that he is not the decision maker. He also tells Reece that he needs to help and give them a reason not to file for the death penalty.

REECE v. STATE

2025 OK CR 8 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 2025

. ¶49 This Court is tasked with determining whether the trial court's view of the facts was clearly erroneous. … He clearly tells him that he is not the decision maker. He also tells Reece that he needs to help and give them a reason not to file for the death penalty.

Smith v. State

83 Okla. Crim. 209 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 1946

Error in refusing to permit to prove antecedent declarations made by deceased which would have tended to establish her death was caused by other means. “6. … In almost all of the cases we have examined, the party charged has had a license to practice medicine, and was at least qualified from a medical standpoint to administer to those upon whom the abortion was performed.

Bryan v. State

935 P.2d 338 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 24, 1997

These clearly told the jury to consider only whether Bryan was competent to stand trial on January 10,1995. … Although no Burks notice was filed, Bryan clearly had notice that the State intended to use this evidence well in advance of trial.

Goings v. State

74 Okla. Crim. 161 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 25, 1942

enmity and hatred which the said Herbert Bates entertained toward this defendant was deepseated and of long standing, bnt this fact was not known to the defendant at the time the jury for the trial of said cause was being qualified … Cr. 332 , 48 P. 2d 864, 869 , it was said: “While it is an established rule of this court that verdicts which receive the approval of the trial judge will not be disturbed when supported by evidence sufficient to malee out

Harmon v. State

248 P.3d 918 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 1, 2011

This expression of anger toward a perceived "snitch" tended to establish his identity as the killer. 12 O.S.2001, § 2401. … He argues it was error to admit the videotaped conversation because his statements and Battle's statements do not specifically and clearly relate to the robbery of the Q & S convenience store.

Garrison v. State

75 O.B.A.J. 3147 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 30, 2004

Clearly, the authorities knew who the witnesses were in 1989 and had the physical evidence in their possession. … See OUJI-CR (2d) 9-8. 1 101 The State argues the evidence "clearly established" Appellant was in flight and had a "consciousness of guilt". But that is an exaggeration.

BEVER v. STATE

467 P.3d 693 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 25, 2020

They do not establish the parameters of the constitutional right to a fair trial." … An abuse of discretion is a conclusion or judgment that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented.

Traxler v. State

96 Okla. Crim. 231 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 10, 1952

In such cases the prevailing applicable rule appears to be that the state authorities are not guilty of laches by failure to bring the incarcerated accused to trial in that “it had been clearly established that the surrender … When property is taken under the circumstances, required to constitute robbery, the fact that the property was of trifling value does not qualify the offense. “§ 796.

Glossip v. State

157 P.3d 143 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 13, 2007

persuasive argument for) its assumption that non-accomplice evidence suggesting that a defendant had a motive to commit a crime, assisted the perpetrator in concealing a crime, or planned to leave the area afterward can qualify … The transcript only clearly indicates one portion of her testimony that the prosecutor wrote down, namely, that Glossip told her to stay in her room when the owner came around.

Malicoat v. State

71 O.B.A.J. 142 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 2000

This was not clearly an abuse of discretion. … Admission of this evidence was not clearly an abuse of discretion.

Wright v. State

72 O.B.A.J. 1998 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 2001

Within the Dodd context, Poorboy does not qualify as a jailhouse informant. … After considering the evidence, the judge should determine whether the movant established the probable truthfulness of the informant's testimony. If not, the testimony *1159 should be excluded.

BENCH v. STATE

2018 OK CR 31 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 4, 2018

Our review for prosecutorial misconduct is well established. … The point here is not just that the attack was brutal and cruel; it clearly was.

Van White v. State

70 O.B.A.J. 870 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 10, 1999

State, 1994 OK CR 74 , 885 P.2d 678 , Appellant now contends the Information in the present case was clearly insufficient. ¶ 13 We find, the Information in the instant case clearly set forth sufficient facts to allege the … However, based on the prosecutor’s erroneous understanding of the law, said reason was insufficient to establish a race-neutral explanation.

Hurt v. State

312 P.2d 169 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 29, 1957

Defendant established that in his testimony confessing his guilt and implicating Robert O. … Though Massad denied this, the evidence was clearly to the contrary. Even excerpts from the tape recording elicited by Massad from Hurt verified attorney-client relationship.

Gilson v. State

71 O.B.A.J. 2063 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 26, 2000

Draper, the trial court found the testimony "does not meet the Dau-bert standards to qualify as expert direct testimony regarding credibility. The eredi-bility, again, is a matter for the finder of fact." … "[In the common law, intentional killing is not the only basis for establishing the most egregious form of eriminal homicide....

Coddington v. State

254 P.3d 684 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 13, 2011

There is no evidence by which this Court can conclusively establish that the trial court left the courtroom in this case. … Such an assessment puts this error clearly within the category of trial error.