Case law

Hames v. State

62 O.B.A.J. 2905 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1991

In Westerman v. State, 525 P.2d 1359 (Okl.Cr.1974), we held that it is the State’s burden to prove compliance with the rules and regulations of the Board of Tests for Alcohol and Drug Influence. … In Overton v.

Griffin v. State

52 Okla. Crim. 106 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 1931

The evidence in the case at bar is practically the same as that in Brown v. State, 52 Okla. … For the reasons stated and upon the authority of Brown v. State, the cause is affirmed. DAVENPORT, P. J., and EDWARDS, J., concur.

Bennett v. State

75 Okla. Crim. 42 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 29, 1942

In the case of Harjo v. State, 70 Okla. … In Fromcke v. State, 37 Okla.

Cox v. State

9 Okla. Crim. 378 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 17, 1913

McCord v. State, 2 Okla. Cr. 209 , 101 Pac. 135 ; Rose v. State, 3 Okla. Cr. 12 , 103 Pac. 1066 ; Brown v. State, 5 Okla. Cr. 567 , 115 Pac. 615 . … Vance v. Territory, 3 Okla. Cr. 208 , 105 Pac. 314 ; Rhea v. Territory, 3 Okla. Cr. 230 , 105 Pac. 314 ; Reed v. Territory, 1 Okla. Cr. 481 , 98 Pac. 583 , 129 Am. St. Rep. 861 .

Chaffin v. State

447 P.2d 445 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 20, 1968

The testimony adduced on the trial of the instant case was almost identical with that introduced during the trial of Kimbro v. … As we stated in Kimbro v.

Dreadfulwater v. State

415 P.2d 493 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 8, 1966

See Hurst v. Pitman, 90 Okl.Cr. 329 , 213 P.2d 877 ; Bonsor v. District Court of Cimarron County, Okl.Cr., 303 P.2d 417 ; White v. Brown, Okl.Cr., 349 P.2d 509 ; Auten v. State, Okl.Cr., 377 P.2d 61 . … In the case of Hurst v.

Bowden v. State

514 P.2d 397 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 6, 1973

In Logan v. State, Okl.Cr., 493 P.2d 842 , we stated: “The defendant does not allege anything other than the passage of time insofar as prejudice to his rights and this Court feels Brown v. … In Dimsdle, supra, six *399 days elapsed; while in Brown, supra, it was eight days; but, in neither case, nor here, did the defendant show deprivation or denial of any substantial right.”

Johnson v. State

611 P.2d 1137 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 21, 1980

See Clay v. State, Okl.Cr., 593 P.2d 509 (1979), and Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 , 97 S.Ct. 2221 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977). NOTES [1] For cases from other jurisdictions, see Annot. … Campana, 452 Pa. 233 , 304 A.2d 432, 435, 436 (1973); State v. Brown, 262 Or. 442 , 497 P.2d 1191 (1972); Noe, Criminal Law — Double Jeopardy — should "Offense" be Defined in Terms of Substantive Law?

Delfrate v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections

70 O.B.A.J. 3458 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 1999

See Wells v. … State v.

Smith v. State

64 O.B.A.J. 3422 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 3, 1993

In Drew v. … The criteria used to determine the sufficiency of the proof is found in Williams v. State, 364 P.2d 702, 704 (Okl.Cr.1961). In this case, most of the convictions were under the name of Angelo Lamont Brown.

Ex Parte Buchanen

1 Okla. Crim. 135 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 15, 1908

(See, also, Higgins v. Brown, ante, this volume, and authorities therein cited.) … Benner v. Porter, 9 How. 235 , 13 L. Ed. 120 ; U. S. v. Pridgeon, 153 U. S. 53, 54 , 14 Sup. Ct. 746, 38 L. Ed. 633 ; Ex parte Larkin, 1 Okla. 53 , 25 Pac. 745 ; U. S. v. Moore, 85 Fed. 465 , 29 C. C. A. 269 .

Blakemore v. State

39 Okla. Crim. 355 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 24, 1928

Shires v. State, 2 Okla. Cr. 89 , 99 P. 1100 ; Frazier v. United States, 2 Okla. Cr. 657 , 103 P. 373 ; Choate v. State, 12 Okla. Cr. 560 , 160 P. 34 , L. R. A. 1917A, 1287; Henry v. State, 14 Okla. … Cr. 189 , 169 P. 658 ; Francis v. State, 16 Okla. Cr. 543 , 185 P. 126 ; Brown v. State, 18 Okla. Cr. 509 , 196 P. 967 . See, also, Underhill’s Crim. Ev. §§ 240, 241.

Surrell v. State

43 Okla. Crim. 97 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 4, 1929

Brown, hereinafter referred to as defendants, were convicted in the county court of Atoka county for the offense of having in their possession 9 gallons of Choctaw beer with intent to barter, sell, give away, and, otherwise … See Strong v. State, 42 *99 Okla. Cr. 245, 275 Pac. 385 , for rule on sufficiency of evidence. The defendants failed to take the witness stand and offered no evidence on their own behalf.

Hendricks v. State

297 P.2d 576 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 9, 1956

Mitchell v. … Adams, assistant county attorney, Craig County; Marie Brown, and Mary Monroe Simms, widow of Paul O. Simms, attorney.

Porter v. State

706 P.2d 540 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 1985

Brown v. State, 487 P.2d 963 (Okl.Cr.1971). In this case, the prosecution had no cause to question the defense witness about his involvement in the theft of a television when no charge or conviction was had against him.

Ex Parte Coffelt

93 Okla. Crim. 343 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1951

In City of Carterville v. Cardwell, 152 Mo. … Biester v.

Young v. State

71 Okla. Crim. 112 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 1941

Nott v. State, 70 Okla. Cr. 432 , 107 P. 2d 366 ; Barfield v. State, 68 Okla. Cr. 455 , 99 P. 2d 544 ; Matthews v. State, 67 Okla. Cr. 203 , 93 P. 2d 549 ; McAfee v. State, 65 Okla. Cr. 65 , 82 P. 2d 1006 ; Boardwine v. … Cr. 49 , 76 P. 2d 1081 ; Arnold v. State, 70 Okla. Cr. 203 , 105 P. 2d 556 ; Brumley v. State, 69 Okla. Cr. 122 , 100 P. 2d 465 ; Skinner v. State, 65 Okla. Cr. 371 , 87 P. 2d 341 .

Dean v. Crisp

536 P.2d 961 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 2, 1975

Undoubtedly, defendant refers to Lamb v. Brown, 456 F.2d 18 (10th Cir. 1972) in which 10 O.S.Supp. 1969, § 1101(a) was declared unconstitutional and Radcliff v. … Anderson, 509 F.2d 1093 (10th Cir. 1975) in which the Tenth Circuit held that the decision in Lamb v. Brown, supra, was to be applied retroactively.

McGee v. State

127 P.3d 1147 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 5, 2006

McGee cites a 1911 case, Brown v. State, 5 Okla.Crim. 567 , 1911 OK CR 120 , 115 P. 615 , for his claim that the final "Trial Information” must supercede any others and constitute the last pleading. … In fact, Brown held that an amended Information, filed before the defendant pleads, in effect set aside the original Information. That is not the case here.

K.F. v. State

61 O.B.A.J. 2318 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 6, 1990

See, Brown v. Florida, 349 So.2d 1196 (Fla.App.1977), cert. denied 434 U.S. 1078 , 98 S.Ct. 1271 , 55 L.Ed.2d 785 (1977) and New Mexico v. Lucero, 96 N.M. 126 , 628 P.2d 696 (App.1971). … Brown, 349 So.2d at 1197 .