<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/U2_A41kutyQ?rel=0″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

This content was written for Cale Law Office

If you’ve been charged with a crime, you want a lawyer who is going to fight for you. Call Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale at 918-277-4800. Your initial consultation is free. You’ll also get a free defense strategy plan.

In a 2009 case the defendant decided to end or what is called a blind plea to a charge of murder. The court conducted a plenary hearing and allowed the defendant to enter and offered plea. In a 2009 case, the defendant decided that he wanted to enter into what is called a blind plea. The District Court held a sentencing hearing and allowed the defendant to enter and offered plea. That’s a plea where the defendant maintains his innocence but concedes that if the state were to put on evidence and call witnesses, then a judge or jury would convict him. The next day the defendant stated that he wanted to withdraw his plea with the trial court denied his motion and advised him to wait until after being sentenced to withdraw the plea. At the conclusion of the sentencing trial, the judge found that there were aggravating circumstances and sentenced him to death. The defendant filed a motion to withdraw his plea. However the court denied his motion.

Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale said that a motion to withdraw a plea must be filed within 10 days. Then a court will set a hearing to determine whether not there is any legal reason why the defendant should be allowed to withdraw his plea. If the motion is denied, the defendant may appeal to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.

Here are the facts of this 2009 case. December 2008 the defendant shot a man six times with the man’s revolver. The man made it to the front yard of his home the collapsed. The defendant then tied the man to the back of his pickup and drag them into a field near the house. Both the defendant and the victim had been friends for a number of years. The victim helped the defendant with addictions, paranoia, and other mental illnesses. The victim attempted to take the defendant to a mental hospital but the defendant was extremely drunk in the two men fought during the trip. The man left the defendant in the parking lot in Norman and drove back to Tulsa for work. The defendant returned to the victim’s home and found and passed out on the couch. There was a gun next to him.

After calling the sheriff’s office to send someone to the house, the later victim agreed to take the defendant back to the mental hospital where he voluntarily admitted himself for treatment. A few days later however, the defendant checked himself out of the hospital called the victim for a ride, and returned to the victim’s home. Defendant drink vodka from the pie. After arriving home, both men shotguns off the porch and played with the dog. Nothing seemed to miss, but soon after the defendant shot and killed the victim. The defendant explained that things started going downhill when he mentioned getting a Christmas present for an ex-girlfriend and her son. The defendant said that the man told him he should forget about the woman as she was sleeping with other people. According to the defendant the victim went on to say that he had been had sex with her. The defendant said that he then snapped, picked up the gun and started shooting the victim. The defendant kept shooting as the victim got up, went to another room, collapsed, having got up to and walked outside.

On appeal, the defendant argued that he entered his offered and guilty pleas as a result of ignorance, inadvertence, misunderstanding and misinformation. He further argued that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel in pursuing his motion to withdraw this please. The state argued that the defendant waived any attacks on the plea proceedings because he told the trial court that he did not want to withdraw his pleas.

The defendant may always seek to withdraw his plea within 10 days after the entry of judgment and sentence, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. The defendant in this case follow the procedure and found the most withdraw his plea soon after he was sentenced. He rehearsed his claim that his plea was through inadvertence or mistake. He also said that his pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily given. Instead he said that they were entered due to coercion and that the sentences were excessive. Additionally he said that he was not mentally competent.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said that at the trial court level no one in this case raise any doubt about his competency by filing an application to determine his competency until after he and pled guilty. The application that was filed lacked specific facts sufficient to raise doubt as to the defense, see other than to state that previous trial counsel believed the defendant to be incompetent. The trial court made a finding that this was competent at the plea hearing and that he was fully competent at the time. No further evidence of incompetency was present at any time.

As to attacking this sentence, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals upheld a finding of the heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstances when there is proof of serious physical abuse where the victim experiences conscious physical suffering before death. The aggravating circumstance is also supported when the defendant inflicts torture, including great physical anguish and mental cruelty. In the case at hand, the trial court found that the bullet wins created great pain and concluded that the victim endured conscious physical suffering resulting in great physical anguish. The trial court also found that the defendant was indifferent to the suffering of the victim. The evidence in the case indicated that the victim was initially shot while sitting in the recliner they did not die immediately. He suffered six gunshot wounds. Through the woods were to the right arm. One shot was to the left arm. The other two shots entered from the back of the victim’s body. One disgrace the Mac in the other was the fatal wound to the back which entered the victims back and lacerated the liver and right lung.