Case law

Jackson v. State

146 P.3d 1149 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 2, 2006

We defer to the trial court's ruling on these issues unless it is clearly erroncous. See Matthews v. … Manning, 672 P.2d 499, 510-12 (Colo.1983)(en banc) because the facts of that case did not qualify. . The Illinois court stated in People v.

Jenkins v. State

80 Okla. Crim. 328 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 2, 1945

Lawrence Jones of Bristow, who having duly qualified as Special Judge, did so participate in the hearing of this case. … established according to the forms and rules of law, prescribed for ascertaining his guilt.

Smith v. State

306 P.3d 557 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 7, 2013

See 22 0.98.2001, § 1051 (establishing a erimi-nal defendant's right to appeal from a judgment rendered against him); 22 O.S. … T 55 The trial court's excusal of these four panelists, for their expressed inability to follow the law on capital punishment, is clearly supported by the record.

Hancock v. State

155 P.3d 796 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 2007

Heuske could not conclusively establish the sequence of shots fired in the case relative to wounds inflicted on Jett and Lynch. … If believed, Gould's testimony established that Appellant had seen Gould at some point the morning after the shootings.

SHEPARD v. STATE

2023 OK CR 15 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 21, 2023

Appellant argues although "a shooting clearly occurred, the evidence reflects randomness and an attempt to escape rather than malice aforethought[.]" … Appellant's allegation is based on nothing more than speculation and does not establish bias.

Williams v. State

22 P.3d 702 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 21, 2001

Y13 The Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions-Criminal set forth the questions and answers a trial judge should ask when death qualifying a jury. See OUJI-CR (2d) 1-5. … It is well established that juries are presumed to follow their instructions. United States. v.

Torres v. States

69 O.B.A.J. 2657 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 1998

The standard for reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is well-established and was set out by the Supreme Court in Strickland v. … Macy’s personal opinion as to the appropriateness of the death penalty and, as such, was clearly improper.”) . 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). . Id. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. at 2064 . . See Woodruff v.

Thurmond v. State

57 Okla. Crim. 388 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 19, 1935

Morris, the duly qualified and acting county attorney in and for Oklahoma county, State of Oklahoma, and on his official oath gives the district court in and for said Oklahoma county and the State of Oklahoma, to know and … The purpose of the questions clearly was to keep persistently before the jury the assumption of damaging facts which could not be proven, and thus impress upon their minds the probability of the existence of the assumed facts

IN RE ADOPTION OF 2019 REVISIONS TO OKLAHOMA JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CRIMINAL (2D)

2019 OK CR 28 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 20, 2019

Committee Comments The elements of second-degree burglary are presented clearly by the statute. … Third, the common law definition is to be followed, in the opinion of the Commission, unless the Legislature has clearly indicated otherwise.

Marquez-Burrola v. State

157 P.3d 749 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 17, 2007

Section 2408, as amended, is not immune to the overarching principles of admissibility found in the Evidence Code. 33 In this case, the prosecutor offered a single photograph of Enriqueta on the day she married Appellant. … All of the mitigating evidence, viewed together, clearly outweighed the evidence supporting the aggravating cireumstances.

HARRIS v. STATE

450 P.3d 933 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2019

Smith's report concludes that "the origin of a fire must be established before a cause can be opined." … Garner worked for several years in a psychiatric setting and was qualified to diagnose mental illness.

Douglas v. State

69 O.B.A.J. 68 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1997

Fundom then qualified her answer stating, “I believe I could, if I felt very strongly.” … The State argued the evidence established Appellant’s identity.

Kizer v. State

67 Okla. Crim. 16 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 28, 1939

I expressed an opinion as to whether or not I would be qualified as a juror after hearing that statement.” “By Mr, Welch: Just a minute, that’s what I objected to.” … It is a well-established rule that impeaching questions should not be propounded to a witness unless they are based upon facts that the interrogator intends to present in refutation of adverse answering of questions propounded