Ross v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ross v. State

1973 OK CR 320, 512 P.2d 1199

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 18, 1973

DocketNo. PC-73-121

StatusPublished

This text of 1973 OK CR 320 (Ross 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

Ross v. State, 1973 OK CR 320, 512 P.2d 1199 (Okla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

BLISS, Presiding Judge:

In the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. 35531, appellant, Claude Eugene Ross, Jr., hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged, tried and convicted for the offense of Grand Larceny, After a Former Conviction of a Felony. His punishment was fixed at ten (10) years imprisonment. On May 10, 1973, appellant filed in the District Court of Oklahoma County his Application for Post-Conviction Relief. Upon the District Court’s denial dated May 10, 1973, defendant filed on June 25, 1973, his timely appeal to this Court.

Defendant alleges one proposition of error, that being his punishment was improperly imposed as the court instructed upon, and the prosecutor commented upon, good time credits at the punishment stage of his trial. We have carefully studied the transcript of trial proceedings and find defendant’s assignment of error to be meritorious. The record clearly shows the prosecutor commented upon good time credits and that the trial court instructed the jury on good time credits, over defendant’s objection, at the second stage of a two-stage proceeding. The giving of such instructions is error. Williams v. State, Okl.Cr., 461 P.2d 997. The judgment and sentence is therefore Modified to a term of six (6) years imprisonment, and as so modified, the judgment and sentence is Affirmed.

BUSSEY, J., concurs.

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

OPINION

BLISS, Presiding Judge:

In the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. 35531, appellant, Claude Eugene Ross, Jr., hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged, tried and convicted for the offense of Grand Larceny, After a Former Conviction of a Felony. His punishment was fixed at ten (10) years imprisonment. On May 10, 1973, appellant filed in the District Court of Oklahoma County his Application for Post-Conviction Relief. Upon the District Court’s denial dated May 10, 1973, defendant filed on June 25, 1973, his timely appeal to this Court.

Defendant alleges one proposition of error, that being his punishment was improperly imposed as the court instructed upon, and the prosecutor commented upon, good time credits at the punishment stage of his trial. We have carefully studied the transcript of trial proceedings and find defendant’s assignment of error to be meritorious. The record clearly shows the prosecutor commented upon good time credits and that the trial court instructed the jury on good time credits, over defendant’s objection, at the second stage of a two-stage proceeding. The giving of such instructions is error. Williams v. State, Okl.Cr., 461 P.2d 997. The judgment and sentence is therefore Modified to a term of six (6) years imprisonment, and as so modified, the judgment and sentence is Affirmed.

BUSSEY, J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1973 OK CR 320, 512 P.2d 1199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-state-oklacrimapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack