Case law

Asher v. State

546 P.2d 1343 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 8, 1976

See, Simon v. … In the case of Fryar v.

Cottrell v. State

52 Okla. Crim. 375 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 28, 1931

In State v. … In Fulkerson v. State, 17 Okla. Cr. 103 , 11?

Ritchie v. State

46 Okla. Crim. 155 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 1930

Roebuck v. State, 14 Okla. Cr. 241 , 170 Pac. 277 ; Adair v. State, 15 Okla. Cr. 619 , 180 Pac. 253 ; Martin v. State, 35 Okla. Cr. 248 , 250 Pac. 552 ; King v. State, 44 Okla. Cr. 311 , 280 Pac. 855 . … Edwards v. State, 9 Okla. Cr. 306 , 131 Pac. 956 , 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 701; Baldock v. State, 16 Okla. Cr. 203 , 182 Pac. 265 ; Burns v. State, 37 Okla.

Harris v. State

167 P.3d 438 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 20, 2007

Browning v. State, 2006 OK CR 37 , 144 P.3d 155, 156 ; Davis v. State, 2005 OK CR 21 , 123 P.3d 243, 244 . 7 . 22 0.S.Supp.2004, § 1089(D)(4)(b)(1). 8 . 22 0.$. … Browning, 144 P.3d at 158 (Court cannot reach alleged trial errors on post-conviction if errors were not raised in post-conviction claims). 29 . Al-Mosawi v.

Al-Mosawi v. State

67 O.B.A.J. 3638 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1996

First, he complains that the admission of a 911 audiotape was hearsay and served to *284 bolster the testimony of witness Michelle Brown. Brown made the 911 call. … See Brown v. State, 506 P.2d 1396, 1399 (Okl.Cr.1973). We find no merit in this proposition. IV. SECOND STAGE ISSUES A.

Todd v. Lansdown

747 P.2d 312 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 31, 1987

As the United States Supreme Court stated in Brown v. … See Brown, supra, 432 U.S. at 167-68 , 97 S.Ct. at 2226-27 . Accordingly, the greater offense is by definition the “same” for purposes of double jeopardy as any lesser offense included in it.

Glossip v. State

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

In Pink v. … In Lanning v.

Bates v. State

96 Okla. Crim. 202 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1952

It would not have been necessary for the officers to have inquired what was in the car if they had known the lugs on the front seat wrapped in heavy brown paper actually contained whiskey. … Morris v. State, 66 Okla. Cr. 384 , 92 P. 2d 609 ; Leary v. State, 61 Okla. Cr. 298 , 67 P. 2d 972 ; Wallace v. State, 49 Okla. Cr. 281 , 294 P. 198 ; Coffey v. State, 38 Okla. Cr. 91 ,. 258 P. 923 ; Whitford v.

Hager v. State

665 P.2d 319 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 21, 1983

Billy Brown was an accomplice to the murder of Tony Corley. … Although Brown’s testimony was certainly admissible, independent corroboration of an accomplice’s testimony must be had before a conviction can stand. 22 O.S.1981, § 742; Trotter v. State, 573 P.2d 1219 (Okl.Cr.1978).

England v. State

29 Okla. Crim. 38 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 17, 1925

Sies v. State, 6 Okla. Cr. 142 , 117 P. 504 ; Brown v. State, 12 Okla. Cr. 343 , 156 P. 1150 ; Broshears v. State, 17 Okla. Cr. 192 , 187 P. 254 . … Inklebarger v. State, 8 Okla. Cr. 316 , 127 P. 707 . Because of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict, the judgment is reversed. BESSEY, P. J., and DOYLE. J., concur.

Poke v. State

515 P.2d 252 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 18, 1973

The Tenth Circuit in Lamb v. … It is clear that the Federal constitution does not compel in every case the retroactivity of a “new” constitutional ruling such as that announced in Lamb v. Brown. See Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.

Gasaway v. Page

448 P.2d 284 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 1968

In Brown v. State, Okl.Cr., 384 P.2d 54 , this court held: “The Oklahoma statute providing that the defendant must in all cases be taken before the magistrate without unnecessary delay, should be strictly followed.” … Brown v. State, supra. The determination of an unnecessary delay which would constitute denial of substantial rights depends on the circumstances and facts of each case. Lut-trell v. Freeman, Okl.Cr., 444 P.2d 857 .

J.M.F. v. STATE

2018 OK CR 29 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 2, 2018

BOX 926 NORMAN, OK 73070 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT JANET BROWN COLLEEN GALAVIZ ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS DISTRICT NO. 7 5905 N. … CLASSEN CT., STE. 301 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118 COUNSEL FOR THE STATE JANET BROWN ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY DISTRICT NO. 7 5905 N.

Davis v. State

560 P.2d 1051 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 2, 1977

In Wright v. … In United States v. Thomas, 489 F.2d 664 (5th Cir. 1973), cited in our recent case of Brown v. State, Okl.Cr., No.

Wood v. State

486 P.2d 750 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 26, 1971

Freeman v. State, 174 Ark. 1035 , 298 S.W. 333 ; 40 C.J.S. Homicide § 42. In Hodges v. … In Tarter v.

Frazier v. State

607 P.2d 709 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 20, 1980

State, Okl.Cr., 430 P.2d 814, 817 (1967), and Brown v. State, Okl.Cr., 487 P.2d 963 (1971). In Robison v. … Whether the matter inquired of was collateral must be determined by the inquiry set forth in Brown v. State, supra, quoting from Payne v.

Billus v. State

7 Okla. Crim. 37 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 8, 1912

In the case of Cohn v. State, 4 Okla. … See Blitz v. Brown, 7 Wall. 693, 19 L. Ed. 280 . We cannot consider the transcript of the record, because it is not certified to by the clerk of the superior court. The appeal must be dismissed.

Horton v. State

44 Okla. Crim. 318 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 14, 1929

Johnson v. State, 35 Okla. Cr. 212 , 249 Pac. 971 ; Smith v. State, 37 Okla. Cr. 85 , 256 Pac. 944 . … Stat. 1921; Byxbee v. State, 41 Okla. Cr. 272 , 272 Pac. 493 ; Nance v. State, 41 Okla. Cr. 379 , 273 Pac. 369 ; Hayes v. State, 41 Okla. Cr. 302 , 274 Pac. 41 .

Buis v. State

792 P.2d 427 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 14, 1990

This line of reasoning has been followed in Brown v. State, 9 Okl.Cr. 382 , 132 P. 359 (1913); Ex parte Green, 69 Okl.Cr. 218 , 101 P.2d 641 (1940); Roberts v. … State, 72 Okl.Cr. 384 , 115 P.2d 270 (1941); In re Williams, 341 P.2d 652 (Okl.Cr.1959); Harvell v. State, 395 P.2d 331 (Okl.Cr.1964); Akers v. State, 491 P.2d 363 (Okl.Cr.1971); Coffer v.

Cox v. State

491 P.2d 357 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 1971

French v. State, Okl.Cr., 397 P.2d 909 (1964), held: “We cannot agree that the court has the right to cite Pardon and Parole Board policies, no matter how well established and generally recognized they are.” … In Carr v.