Opinion ID: 146297
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Second-degree murder was a lesser-included offense at the time of Mr. Phillips trial and at the time the OCCA denied Mr. Phillips's petition for rehearing.

Text: Before we turn to Mr. Phillips's contention that the Due Process Clause entitled him to an instruction on the lesser-included offense of second-degree depraved mind murder, we must consider Oklahoma's shifting precedents and statutes. In May 1997, at the time of Mr. Phillips's trial, the OCCA considered second-degree depraved mind murder to be a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder. See Willingham v. Mullin, 296 F.3d 917, 922-26 (10th Cir.2002). In October 1997, while Mr. Phillips's direct appeal was pending, the OCCA issued Willingham v. State, 947 P.2d 1074, 1080-81 (Okla.Crim.App.1997), which revisit[ed] the elements of second degree depraved mind murder and recognized that the OCCA's case law failed to recognize [a 1976 amendment to the state's murder scheme] in the statutes. Id. at 1081. Because of that amended statute, the OCCA decided Mr. Phillips's direct appeal (Oct. 15, 1999) by applying Willingham v. State 's holding that second-degree depraved mind murder was not a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder. Phillips, 989 P.2d at 1034. However, on October 27, 1999, just twelve days after the OCCA decided Mr. Phillips's direct appeal, the OCCA candidly recognized its continue[d] ... inconsisten[cy] in its approach to lesser included offenses. Shrum v. State, 991 P.2d 1032, 1036 (Okla.Crim.App.1999). The court adopted the common law and majority view that all lesser forms of homicide are necessarily included and instructions on lesser forms of homicide should be administered if they are supported by the evidence. Id. The OCCA's decision was prospective only and would apply only to those cases now pending on appeal and in all future cases. Id. While his case was still on direct appeal, on November 4, 1999, Mr. Phillips filed a petition for rehearing, and again raised the lesser-included offense/ Beck argument, citing Shrum. [1] The OCCA denied Mr. Phillips's petition on December 14, 1999. The OCCA determined that while Shrum was not cited in the [OCCA opinion], [2] the same analysis used in the Shrum case was utilized in [Mr. Phillips's] case. Order Denying Rehearing at 4. We now turn to the substance of Mr. Phillips's argument that he was entitled to a second-degree depraved mind murder instruction under Beck v. Alabama . As we explain below, to the extent the OCCA applied Shrum, its application was contrary to the clearly established Supreme Court law of Beck.