Opinion ID: 2575863
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: The Reviewability/Appealability of Judicial Consolidation Decisions

Text: ¶ 17 An aggrieved party may secure review of every preserved prejudicial error committed at nisi prius in the course of proceedings which precede an appealable decision. [25] This common-law concept of reviewability is explicitly embodied in the terms of 12 O.S.2001 § 952(a). [26] ¶ 18 Error in the trial court's refusal to adjudicate a claim arising from the earlier arrest has not been shown. This is so because the claim to money seized in the first case has absolutely no connection to the forfeiture now before us on this appeal. Mitchell's request for relief from two seizures of money presents discrete claims arising out of separate occurrences which have no commonality in law or fact. The trial court severed from this (second) forfeiture any claim to money seized and forfeited in the earlier case. We will not reach Mitchell's claim arising out of the earlier disconnected forfeiture. It is not before us. ¶ 19 In short, claimant is entitled to no corrective relief from the nisi prius consolidation's denial.