|
|
|
| Curative Instructions |
|
McNeil v. State,
No. F-2004-197 (Okl.Cr., June 8, 2005) (Unpublished): Winner on the issue of evidentiary harpoons(!) McNeil was convicted of Possession of Meth and Resisting. The Court held that the cumulative effect of the officer's testimony was to "suggest that McNeil...was a much worse person, and much more dangerous criminal, than the evidence before this jury suggested." The officer repeatedly referenced other crimes, McNeil's supposed dangerousness, and methamphetamine manufacturing. Note: the trial court admonished the jury on two of the harpoons but the Court held that the error was not cured. Also note: Judge Lumpkin's dissenting opinion outlines in detail the harpoons.
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Moore v. State,
No. F-2005-1031 (Okl.Cr., November 8, 2006) (unpublished): Sufficiency of the Evidence; Jury Instructions: Defense Requested Instructions; Curative Instructions: Moore was convicted by jury in Caddo County of Shooting w/Intent to Kill and KCSP. He was sentenced to 50 and 5 years, respectively, by the Hon. Wyatt Hill. HELD: 1) the KCSP count is reversed for insufficient evidence; and 2) the SWIK count is affirmed but remanded for re-sentencing pursuant to the 85% rule. Good language from the Court on the sufficiency claim. The Court stated that "mere possession of stolen property is not enough; possession must be supplemented with facts inconsistent with honest possession." Error was found also in the prosecutor's repeated statements that Moore did not take any action to give the gun back to the owner (improper comment on Moore's right to remain silent) and the single admonition did not cure the error. Finally, trial counsel requested an 85% instruction when the jury sent a note inquiring about parole eligibility and the trial court refused it. Thus, the principal count is reversed and remanded for re-sentencing.
|
|
|
|
