Case law

Mathies v. State

56 Okla. Crim. 308 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 7, 1934

To the same effect are: State of Louisiana v. Hahn, 38 La. Ann. 169 ; People v. Eppinger, 105 Cal. 36 , 38 Pac. 538 ; People v. Sanders, 114 Cal. 216 , 46 Pac. 153 ; People v. Gordon, 13 Cal. … App. 678 , 110 Pac. 469 ; State v. Peeples, 71 Wash. 451 , 129 Pac. 108 ; Miner v. State, 27 Ariz. 248 , *314 232 Pac. 875 ; People v. Ruche, 74 Cal. App. 556 , 241 Pac. 279 .

Mayfield v. State

488 P.2d 1311 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 9, 1971

(Tr. 125-126) A similar question was resolved by this Court in Tucker v. … Overstreet v. State, Okl. Cr., 483 P.2d 738 . We, therefore, find this proposition to be without merit.

McManus v. State

695 P.2d 884 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 24, 1985

Westerman v. State, 525 P.2d 1359 (Okl.Cr.1974). … Webster v. State, 96 Okl.Cr. 44 , 248 P.2d 646 (1952). Improper questioning by the prosecutor is also complained of in this case.

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.

White v. State

4 Okla. Crim. 143 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1910

In the case of Blair v. … In George v. United States, 1 Okla.

Ray v. Stevenson

71 Okla. Crim. 339 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 19, 1941

extent as if the new members as such board had made the contract and no further.” *351 See, also, Warner v. … City of Guymon, 176 Okla. 419 , 55 P. 2d 969 ; Board of Education of City of Bartlesville v. Schmidt, 111 Okla. 277 , 239 P. 580 ; State v. Sowards, 64 Okla. Cr. 430 , 82 P. 2d 324 .

Ex Parte Hand

13 Okla. Crim. 614 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 14, 1917

Leighnor was appointed to the office of justice of the peace by the board of trustees of said town, and riot by the board of county commissioners of the county. … the town or by the board of county commissioners.

Walton v. State

594 P.2d 794 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 26, 1979

At the hearing, Officer Brown testified that sometime after the waiver had been executed, defendant informed him that he had taken some Valiums. … See McCoy v. State, Okl.Cr., 534 P.2d 1317 (1975), Henson v. State, Okl.Cr., 522 P.2d 299 (1974) and Cooper v. State, Okl.Cr., 560 P.2d 1018 (1977). We therefore find this assignment of error to be without merit.

Holbird v. State

650 P.2d 66 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 24, 1982

Holmes v. State, supra. … Babek v. State, 587 P.2d 1375 (Okl.Cr.1978). In evaluating the circumstances of this case we find that sufficient intervening factors exist to purge any taint originating from the conduct of the officers. See Brown v.

Underwood v. State

252 P.3d 221 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2011

Brown v. Texas, 448 U.S. 47 , 50-51, 99 S.Ct. 2687 , 2640, 61 L.Ed.2d 357 (1979); Lookingbill v. State, 2007 OK CR 7 , $15, 157 P.3d 180, 1834 . … Considering the factors enunciated in Brown v.

Sowell v. State

620 P.2d 429 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 7, 1980

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 , 95 S.Ct. 2574 , 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975). As stated recently in the United States Supreme Court decision of Brown v. … Brown v. Texas, supra. In summing up the actions of Officer Barham it is apparent that he intended to stop and detain the defendant because he “looked suspicious.”

Steward v. State

554 P.2d 858 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 13, 1976

Brenda Kay White testified that on March 13, 1975 she had occasion to be in Louise Brown’s apartment several times. … The record clearly reflects that the trial judge and the Assistant District Attorney went to great lengths to abide by the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Bruton v. U.

Scroggins v. State

91 Okla. Crim. 428 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 14, 1950

Littlejohn v. State, 32 Okla. Cr. 401 , 241 P. 210 . A case clearly in point is Brown v. State, 33 Okla. … Further, in quoting from Martin v.

Hall v. State

565 P.2d 57 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 27, 1977

. *59 The trial court held an in camera hearing as required by Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293 , 87 S.Ct. 1967 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967), and Thompson v. … Melot v. State, Okl.Cr., 375 P.2d 343 (1962); however, in the instant case we do not feel that it was required. The question of witness identification has been discussed at length in Commonwealth v.

Cooper v. State

552 P.2d 406 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 9, 1976

Brown, 10 Cir., 456 F.2d 18 . This Court has previously held that the decision in Lamb v. … Brown, supra, did not serve to hold as unconstitutional the otherwise valid laws in existence under our Juvenile Code prior to April 4, 1972. In Dean v.

Radcliff v. State

490 P.2d 1398 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 18, 1971

French v. State, Okl.Cr., 397 P.2d 909 ; Williams v. State, Okl.Cr., 461 P.2d 997 . … See Hardway v. Page, Okl.Cr., 446 P.2d 72 and Snake v. Page, Okl.Cr., 486 P.2d 762 .

Calloway v. State

38 Okla. Crim. 418 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1928

Brown persisted in stating in the record his statement in the presence of the jury.” … And see Wilson v. State, 17 Okla. Cr. 47 , 183 P. 613 ; Harper v. State, 20 Okla. Cr. 43 , 200 P. 879 ; Pusley v. State, 22 Okla. Cr. 192 , 210 P. 306 ; Shields v. State, 32 Okla. Cr. 344 , 240 P. 661 .

Harper v. Young

852 P.2d 164 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 11, 1993

Conditional Supervision Program (PPCS), pursuant to 57 O.S.1991, § 365; that he violated no rules or conditions of the PPCS; but was nonetheless removed from the program without due process requirements set forth in Morrissey v. … We need not go through a complete discussion of Petitioner’s due process complaint, as it is not dispositive of the issue before us and is fully addressed in Barnett v. Moon, 852 P.2d 161 , 64 OBJ 1281 (Okl.Cr.1993).

Coppage v. State

77 Okla. Crim. 414 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 20, 1943

Co-ppage v. State, supra, Beulah Johnson, a police matron, testified to taking the witness, Hartsill Brown, to examine the Chevrolet car on October 20, 1941, after the preliminary examination. … Rogers v. State, 8 Okla. Cr. 226 , 127 P. 365 ; Kirk v. State, 11 Okla. Cr. 203 , 145 P. 307 ; Wisdom v. State, 18 Okla. Cr. 118 , 193 P. 1003 ; Millett v. State, 36 Okla. Cr. 309 , 253 P. 1039 ; Chatham v.

Ware v. State

71 Okla. Crim. 232 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 12, 1941

Williams v. State, 56 Okla. Cr. 245 , 37 P. 2d 658 ; Ellis v. State, 54 Okla. Cr. 295 , 19 P. 2d 972 ; Jones v. Territory, 4 Okla. 45 , 43 P. 1072 ; Ex parte Meyers, 55 Okla. Cr. 75 , 24 P. 2d 1011 ; Hendrix v. … Price v. United States, 1 Okla. Cr. 291 , 97 P. 1056 ; Miller v. Territory, 15 Okla. Cr. 422 , 85 P. 239 ; Kilgore v. State, 10 Okla. Cr. 446 , 137 P. 364 ; McCarty v. State, 21 Okla. Cr. 365 , 207 P. 1069 .