Opinion No. Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports·Decided July 12, 1949·Published

Opinion

OPINION — AG — ** TRANSCRIPT — RIGHT — COSTS ** ANY IDEA THAT A DEFENDANT COULD REFUSE TO PAY FOR THE TAKING AND TRANSCRIBING OF THE TESTIMONY AND AT THE SAME TIME REFUSE "TO PROCEED OR PERMIT THE COURT TO PROCEED WITH THE EXAMINATION" SEEMS NOVEL INDEED. THE AUTHORITY OF A COURT TO PROCEED WITH AN EXAMINATION AND TAKING OF TESTIMONY IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON THE PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF THE DEFENDANT, AND WE AGREE THAT UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THE COURT HAS FULL AUTHORITY TO PROCEED WITHOUT REGARD TO THE WISHES OF THE DEFENDANT. (EQUAL PROTECTION, PAYMENT, INDIGENT, CRIMINAL) CITE: 22 O.S. 258 [22-258], 62 O.S. 323 [62-323] (SAM H. LATTIMORE)

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

Opinion No. Ag, (Okla. Super. Ct. 1949).

Opinion No. Ag (Opinion No. Ag) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.