Ransdell v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Corrections

2013 OK 106, 322 P.3d 1064, 2013 WL 6576032, 2013 Okla. LEXIS 143
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedDecember 13, 2013
DocketNo. 111589
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 2013 OK 106 (Ransdell v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ransdell v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2013 OK 106, 322 P.3d 1064, 2013 WL 6576032, 2013 Okla. LEXIS 143 (Okla. 2013).

Opinions

ORDER OF SUMMARY DISPOSITION

¶ 1 In this ease, the record reflects Plaintiff/Appellant, John David Ransdell came to Oklahoma in 1999,1 well before the contested 2007-2008 sex offender level assignment system 2 was enacted in Oklahoma. In our recent decision in Starkey v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2013 OK 43, 305 P.3d 1004, we determined the level assignment system is not to be applied retroactively and the applicable version of the Sex Offenders Registration Act, 57 O.S., § 581 et seq., is the one in place when an out-of-state sex offender enters Oklahoma with the intent “to ‘be in the state’ for the requisite period-3” This case is dispositive of the issues presented.

¶ 2 Rule 1.201 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules provides that “[i]n any case in which it appears that a prior controlling appellate decision is dispositive of the appeal, the court may summarily affirm or reverse, citing in its order of summary disposition this rule and the controlling decision. At any time during the pendency of the appeal any party may move for summary disposition, citing the prior controlling decision. The motion shall be served on opposing counsel who may respond within ten (10) days. Thereafter, the court may enter an order summarily affirming, reversing, or denying the motion.” Okla. Stat. tit. 12, chap. 15, app. 2 (Supp.1997).

¶ 3 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the district court’s Journal Entry of Judgment filed February 15, 2013, is hereby reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with Starkey v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2013 OK 43, 305 P.3d 1004.

¶ 4 DONE BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CONFERENCE this 12th day of December, 2013.

¶ 5 COLBERT, C.J., REIF, Y.C.J., KAUGER, WATT, EDMONDSON, COMBS and GURICH, JJ., concur. ¶ 6 WINCHESTER and TAYLOR, JJ., dissent.

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

Related

DONALDSON v. CITY OF EL RENO
2025 OK 9 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2025)
DAVIS v. OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
2016 OK CIV APP 23 (Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2013 OK 106, 322 P.3d 1064, 2013 WL 6576032, 2013 Okla. LEXIS 143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ransdell-v-state-ex-rel-oklahoma-department-of-corrections-okla-2013.