Kelso v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Kelso v. State

1987 OK CR 104, 737 P.2d 1225, 1987 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 389

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 26, 1987

DocketNo. F-86-34

StatusPublished

This text of 1987 OK CR 104 (Kelso v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kelso v. State, 1987 OK CR 104, 737 P.2d 1225, 1987 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 389 (Okla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

BRETT, Presiding Judge:

The appellant, Terry Hugh Kelso, was convicted by jury in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CRF-84-4402, of Murder in the First Degree and Assault and Battery With a Dangerous Weapon. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and ten years’ imprisonment, respectively, with the sentences to run concurrently.

The only assignment of error urged on appeal is that the trial court erred in refusing to grant probation. This complaint is premised on a statement by the Honorable Joe Jennings, District Judge, wherein he expressed his sentiment that “[First-Degree Murder is] an offense that the court considers not to be a probationary type case_” Appellant’s construction of this statement is that Judge Jennings did not know that he has the authority to suspend all or part of a life sentence.

We disagree. We believe that a fairer reading of the statement is that Judge Jennings believes probation is inappropriate, rather than unauthorized, in first-degree murder cases.

The granting of a suspended sentence lies within the trial court’s discretion, and that decision will not-be disturbed on appeal absent abuse of discretion. White v. State, 702 P.2d 1058 (Okl.Cr.1985). This Court is unable to say that Judge Jennings abused his discretion since this Court was not presented even the barest facts underlying the conviction. All the record before this Court shows is that, according to the information, the appellant shot and killed Bobby Jack Reynolds and also shot Gregory Martin Sharp. Accordingly, the judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.

In closing, we note that the Attorney General does not dispute appellant’s contention that a trial judge has the authority to suspend a life sentence. The appellant may again apply for a suspended sentence within ten days of the final order of this Court. See 22 O.S.1981, § 994.

PARKS, J. concurs. BUSSEY, J., concurs in results.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

BRETT, Presiding Judge:

The appellant, Terry Hugh Kelso, was convicted by jury in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CRF-84-4402, of Murder in the First Degree and Assault and Battery With a Dangerous Weapon. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and ten years’ imprisonment, respectively, with the sentences to run concurrently.

The only assignment of error urged on appeal is that the trial court erred in refusing to grant probation. This complaint is premised on a statement by the Honorable Joe Jennings, District Judge, wherein he expressed his sentiment that “[First-Degree Murder is] an offense that the court considers not to be a probationary type case_” Appellant’s construction of this statement is that Judge Jennings did not know that he has the authority to suspend all or part of a life sentence.

We disagree. We believe that a fairer reading of the statement is that Judge Jennings believes probation is inappropriate, rather than unauthorized, in first-degree murder cases.

The granting of a suspended sentence lies within the trial court’s discretion, and that decision will not-be disturbed on appeal absent abuse of discretion. White v. State, 702 P.2d 1058 (Okl.Cr.1985). This Court is unable to say that Judge Jennings abused his discretion since this Court was not presented even the barest facts underlying the conviction. All the record before this Court shows is that, according to the information, the appellant shot and killed Bobby Jack Reynolds and also shot Gregory Martin Sharp. Accordingly, the judgments and sentences are AFFIRMED.

In closing, we note that the Attorney General does not dispute appellant’s contention that a trial judge has the authority to suspend a life sentence. The appellant may again apply for a suspended sentence within ten days of the final order of this Court. See 22 O.S.1981, § 994.

PARKS, J. concurs. BUSSEY, J., concurs in results.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1987 OK CR 104, 737 P.2d 1225, 1987 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelso-v-state-oklacrimapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack