Criminal Defense Attorney Tulsa Works Hard Lifting the Burden
This content was written for Cale Law Office

Are you facing criminal charges? Consider the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer. For aggressive and experienced criminal defense, call the Cale Law Office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with attorney Stephen Cale. Attorney Cale has been practicing for 20 years. Plus, he’s the kind of attorney for you because he dedicates his practice to criminal defense.

Serving clients throughout Oklahoma and Northeastern Oklahoma, including Tulsa County, Jenks, Glenpool, Bixby, Collinsville, Owasso, Sand Springs, Sapulpa, Rogers County, Catoosa, Claremore, Mayes County, Adair, Chouteau, Disney, Grand Lake, Langley, Locust Grove, Pensacola, Salina, Spavinaw, Wagoner County, Coweta, Muskogee County, Webbers Falls, Okmulgee County, Pawnee County, Keystone Lake, Osage County, Pawhuska, Hominy, Nowata County, Coffeyville, Craig County, Vinita, Big Cabin, Washington County, Bartlesville, Copan, and Dewey.

After to relationship the victim and, the defendant contained make unwanted and threatening contact with her. On one occasion, the defendant confronted him physically assaulting a friend of the victim. The same day, the defendant vandalized the victim’s car with spray paint. The victim sought emergency protection order against the defendant. Officers served him with the order the following day. This is a situation where the defendant will need the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer.

If you find they been served with a victim’s protective order, look for the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has offer. Attorney Stephen Cale has handled numerous victim protective order case. He is a highly skilled and experienced Tulsa criminal lawyer. Look for informational videos concerning victim’s protective orders on his website at In violation of the protective order, the defendant followed victim in his truck after she left a friends house. The defendant pulled in front of her and slammed on his brakes.

This forced her to take evasive action. The defendant then pointed a handgun out the window and shot another car. The defendant also continued to arrest the victim in violate the protective order by sending text messages and leaving notes in her car window. On appeal, the defendant argues his convictions for felonies talking and other charges violate the statutory prohibition against multiple punishments for single criminal act. He also argues that the constitutional prohibit against double jeopardy. He failed to raise these objections a trial, therefore waiting all but plain error. On appeal, he must show that a plain error affected the outcome of the proceedings.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals will correct plain error only where it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public record reputation of the proceedings. A proper analysis focuses on the relationship between the crimes. If two or more crimes truly rise held of one act, the law prohibits prosecution and punishment of more than one crime. Anyone charged with a crime needs to hire the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer. The only to determine the omission of the element from the jury instruction affected the defendant’s substantial rights is to evaluate for this one thing. Determine the effect on the jury verdict and whether the same test applies.

The question to be resolved in this analysis is whether it appears be unoriginal doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the jury verdict. In other words, it’s whether it is clear be unoriginal doubt that the rest on jury would’ve found the defendant guilty without the error. So when an element is supported by uncontroverted evidence that’s what happens. Making a lewd proposal to a child that’s because of the defendant’s belief of his intended child victims age was supported by strong uncontroverted evidence.

Criminal Defense Attorney Tulsa | Lessening the Pressure

The jury had sufficient undisputed evidence to conclude that the defendant believed the person whom he directed the proposal to a child under 16 years of age. Specifically, the detective posing as a child name Francesca told the defendant several times that she was 12 years old. Defendant admitted knowing or believing that Francesco was 15 years old. Furthermore, the defendant did not substitute these facts. He even stipulated that he was 30 years old. Therefore the evidence was overwhelming and uncontroverted that the defendant was more than three years older than Francesca.

The best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer will fight hard to get the case dismissed. This can be done through a series of pretrial motions. When the first things that attorney Cale does is look at the charge itself to see if it’s even valid. He has had success in getting charges dismissed based on technicalities. For aggressive and expense criminal defense, call the Cale Law Office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with attorney Stephen Cale.

On this evidence, fully aware that there is no actual child victim, the jury nonetheless found the defendant guilty despite not been instructed he can do so. It can do so by finding that he believed he was propositioning a child. Given the strong and uncontested evidence of the defense belief that he was commuting with a 15-year-old child, it’s obvious that a properly instructed jury would’ve been even more likely to return a guilty verdict. On this basis, it’s clear be unoriginal doubt that the defective jury instruction did not contribute to the verdict. Were reviewing court concludes be unoriginal doubt the amended element was uncontested the erroneous instruction is properly found to be harmless. There’s no plain error in this instance.

In connection with this claim, defendant also contends that the trial court erred by issuing the following nonuniform instruction. The defendant contended that this instruction is in the trap meant instruction that was improperly given because he never raised and entrapment defense. The best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer will look to see if an entrapment defense is available for your lewd proposal to a child charge. A conviction for this carries a stiff prison sentence. That’s why you need an aggressive and experienced Tulsa criminal lawyer.

The defendant further argues that the instruction is misleading, allowing the state need not prove those portions of instruction listing ailments of the fence. The defendant points to a note from jurors that asked the question concerning the jury instructions. The state argues that the supplemental instruction is not entrapment defense instruction. Instead, it’s an explanation of the elements the crime charged. According to the state, instruction supplemented the uniform jury instruction given to instruction by allowing the jury to find the defendant guilty of the police officer is posing as a victim. The defendant objected to this instruction, preserving the alleged error for this court review. The trial court rulings on jury instructions are reviewed for an abuse of discretion. If instructions as a whole accurately state applicable law, there’s no abuse of discretion.