Court Opinion

ID: 9553690
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:33:28.742126+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:05.351050
License: Public Domain

LUMPKIN, Judge,
concurring in part/dissenting in part.
I concur in the Court’s decision affirming the guilty pleas in CRF-84-1997 and CRF-85-4292 and reversing the revocation in CRF-85-53 for lack of jurisdiction. However, I must dissent to the remand for further proceedings in CRF-84-1997 and CRF-85-4292. This Court is authorized to modify a sentence but does not have the authority to remand for resentencing in an appeal from a plea of guilty by Petitioner for writ of certiorari in a non-capital case. 22 O.S.1981, § 1066. See also Dean v. State, 778 P.2d 476 (Okl.Cr.1989). Resentencing in non-capital cases is only authorized as a remedy under the Post-Conviction Procedure Act. 22 O.S.1981, § 1085.
The record is not sufficient to warrant a modification of the sentences. Based on the facts of the case I find no abuse of discretion and would affirm the plea and sentences in CRF-84-1997 and CRF-85-4292.