Criminal Defense Attorney Tulsa | Domestic Abuse Charge | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office

Are you facing a domestic abuse charge? Then you need the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer. Call the Cale Law Office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with attorney Stephen Cale. Attorney Cale has been practicing for nearly two decades. Plus, he’s the right kind of attorney for your case because he dedicates his practice to criminal defense. Attorney Cale will develop a free defense strategy plan document custom-made for your case.

Prosecutors charged the defendant with forcible entry and detainer an assault and battery. The jury convicted her the forcible entry but acquitted her of the domestic assault battery. She was sentenced to six months in the county jail. The defendant appealed. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction and remanded the matter for new trial. Here’s a summary of the facts of the case.

On the February afternoon, the defendant and her daughter went to the home a woman to collect some personal items. Besides included tapes in the defendants wedding ring. The woman gave the defendant tapes. However she cannot find a ring. The woman told her that she would look for and send it to the defendant later, which he did. Upset about this, the defendant gate over the lock screen door and kicked in the front door and entered the house. A struggle ensued on the front porch between the two women. A police officer who happened to be passing by the time the fight finally broke it up.

On appeal, the defendant contended the trial court should have allowed her defense witnesses to testify as to the truthfulness of the states may witness. The trial court sustained states objected to the testimony because the carrot of six witnesses had not been attacked. The defendant argues that testimony is admissible. She argued that the character the state’s witnesses did not need to be attacked. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals agreed that the trial court made a mistake.

The rules of evidence allow the credibility of a witness to be impeachment reputation opinion evidence was cared for untruthfulness. In order to introduce evidence of truthfulness, the witnesses character must first be attacked. In the case at hand, defense witnesses was asked her opinion as to the truthfulness of the main state witness. The trial court sustained the state’s objection to the question the grounds of the character the states witness in the attack. This ruling was clearly erroneous.

Better dismiss evidence, the defendant was attempting to attack the witness’s character. At that point, in rebuttal, the state we been allowed to present evidence that the woman was truthful. Although this is a case of first impression of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, it found that the trial court clearly aired and sustained the state’s objection. This error is not harmless error. The test when the witness was the case against the appellate. Her credibility was crucial. It’s reasonable that the result may been different if evidence was presented to the jury. This is especially true since the equivalent defendant of assault battery charge.
Criminal Defense Attorney Tulsa | Domestic Abuse Charge

If you want to appeal your criminal conviction, you need the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has to offer. Call the Cale Law Office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with attorney Stephen Cale. Attorney Cale is highly praised for his legal writing skills. This is something that is crucial for appeals. Attorney Cale is also a skilled trial lawyer.

Judge Lumpkin concurred in the result reached by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. However, he did not agree that this case was one of first impression. Additionally, there are some questions as to whether the question to the witness was asked in the proper format to raise the issue presented. The question did not asked the witness had knowledge as to the witnesses reputation are character for truthfulness. Instead, the question was asked in a manner that seem to request an opinion regarding the witness. If so, the question was a properly objection should been sustained.

The real issue presented was with the defendant could been convicted of a crime. A literal reading of the statute reveals legislative drafters by usually a, after using a procuring. The owner reported case of putting the statute is from 1899. In that case, the court stated the information this case specifically alleged force or violence used by the defendant. It does not provide insight as to the persons are subject prosecution of its provisions. It appears the case should be remanded for instructions to dismiss.

In another case, the defendant to assist particular road and rule Tulsa County. He said that the methamphetamine lavatories for methamphetamine. Defendant Smith making friends gathered all the ingredients necessary to make methamphetamine. They lived in the car earlier that day. The defendant went to complete the catalog because one of them became yield state time.

Before the defendant left, he has the front of he could borrow his gun in case you pulled over had trouble with police. The friend understood that the defendant when the pistol so he could shoot and kill any officer to try to take in the jail. The defendant had been arrested for possession of methamphetamine if you are years earlier. At that time, he was arrest for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. Following his arrest, the defendant explained to the friend of his other mythmaking friends cannot go back to jail.

This was because they would not be able to bond out. He threatened which should kill the officers before he went back to jail. The defendant’s up a level the ground outside the car. The defendant fell asleep in the front seat as the cables calls process. In the early morning hours, a local newspaper delivery person discover the defendant. During that he was day, this person contacted family friend that lived her body. The woman Trevor to the trooper’s home and woke him up.

The trooper was not scheduled to be on duty until 9 AM on a date. So he reported the circumstances to the Oklahoma Highway Patrol Dispatch. When the trooper learned that no one else was available, he volunteered to enter service early and check out the situation. The trooper went on duty around 630. Shortly thereafter he informed Dispatch they discovered a white car.