This content was written for Cale Law office
Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale has nearly two decades of experience representing people charged with a crime. If you’re facing criminal charge, call the Cale Law office at 918-277-4800 for your free initial consultation. You’ll also receive a free defense strategy plan.
In one case an officer testified that he robbery victim. When the victim was shown a picture that to indicated through body language that he recognized the defendant is the man who robbed him. However the victim did not make any pretrial identification of the defendant and failed to identify the defendant at trial. The appellate court saw the officer’s testimony is an attempt to take the victim’s lack of explicit identification as a positive identification. The court found that using the testimony of this officer was a guise of expert opinion, and therefore, error.
In that case, the officers testified to something that can only be known by someone with some sort of specialized knowledge, that being injuries received from jumping off a building in the nonverbal body language. The officers came their opinions on an issue any lay witness can give. The issue was whether the decedents injuries to her head looked consistent with that received from a fall to the ground from a standing position. There are instances in which a person can testify as to personal observations and offer lay witness opinion testimony.
Paramedic testify that he arrived at the same found lying on the floor. He was not present when the victim received injuries. Paramedic testified that he saw the injuries and prepare the victim for transport to the hospital. His testimony concerning the source the victim’s injuries was based on his own personal observation. Therefore it was properly admitted as lay opinion testimony.
The defendant argued that the trial court erred in refusing to give is requested instructions on the lesser included offense of heat of passion manslaughter and a second degree depraved mind murder. He said such instructions were warranted by the evidence. The trial court has discretion to determine which instructions will be given to a jury. Unless there’s an abusive that discretion, and appellate court will not interfere with the trial court’s judgment if the instructions as a whole accurately state the applicable law.
When a defendant defense against the charge by proclaiming that he is not guilty, he’s not entitled to instructions on any lesser included offense. This rule applies regardless of whether the defendant presents his defense through his own testimony at trial as well as when the theory of defense is presented through statements of counsel. When the defendant makes admissions through counsel during the trial the render every defense unavailable except one, is deemed to have let elected that defense. A defendant may buy has election foreclose the submission of instructions on other theories defense.
The US Supreme Court is held that a sentence of death cannot be constitutionally imposed when the jury was not permitted to consider a lesser included noncapital defense and the evidence would have supported such a verdict. However, the court is also held that due process does not require the jury to be instructed on every noncapital lesser included offense supported by the evidence. All that is required is that the jury may not placed in an all or nothing choice between capital murder and innocence.
A person convicted of first-degree murder in Oklahoma does not automatically get the death penalty. The jury is not instructed that if they convict the defendant of the charge they are required to impose the death penalty. Instead the jury has a choice. In the sentencing states in this way mitigating evidence against aggravating circumstances before deciding to impose a sentence of life in prison or life in prison without the possibility of parole, or death.
In the case at hand, since the defendant elected to defend himself on a claim of innocence and not guilty of a lesser offense, there is no evidence of a lesser offense to consider. His defense counsel did not present evidence nor argue that the defendant killed the victim but did so without malice. In one case the defendant committed not only to killing the victim, but they intended to kill the victim and that he would do the same thing again in similar circumstances. The Supreme Court found that the evidence only support the claim that the respondent intent to kill the victim, but negated any claim that he did not intend to kill the victim. Therefore, and instruction on a lesser included form of homicide was not warranted. Find the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney near you.
In his next argument, the defendant argued that improper argument concerning flight in the absence of a jury instruction on flight to nine is due process rights to a fair trial. However, the record showed that there was no instruction on flight requested. During closing argument, the prosecutor referred to defendant leaving the victim’s home after she had been being in his absence wants police arrived. Defense counsel did not object to the absence of the flight instruction or the argument regarding flight. Instructions on flight should be given only in cases where the evidence is controverted by the defendant and as an exception rather than. Before instruction is given, the defendant must first present evidence explaining is departure.
Evidence of the defendant’s actions after a crime is committed, including flight, is relevant to show consciousness of guilt, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. Sufficiency of the evidence claims are reviewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime unoriginal doubt. And appellate court will accept all reasonable inferences and credibility choices that tend to support the verdict. That’s why people need the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney.
A designed to affect death is inferred from the fact of killing, unless circumstances raise a reasonable doubt whether such design existed. Premeditation sufficient to constitute murder may be formed in an instant or may be formed instantaneously as the killing has being committed, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. Malice aforethought may be proved by circumstantial evidence. Without a doubt, the evidence showed that the victim and her son quarreled and had a physical altercation shortly before her murder. The defendant shouted at his elderly mother and cursed her for taking some food.