Court Opinion

ID: 5161661
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-02 02:53:08.300324+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:25:38.893503
License: Public Domain

[14] In Broaddrick v. State, 706 P.2d 534 (Okla. Cr. 1985) we reiterated the long-standing rule in this jurisdiction that a "defendant is entitled, as a matter of law, to have the jury instructed on his theory of the case if it finds possible support in the evidence. . . . This is so even if the evidence is discredited." Id. at 536 (citations omitted). I therefore believe the trial court erred herein when it failed to instruct the jury on appellant's theory of the case, towit: self-defense. *Page 207 
[15] However, this is a case in which the evidence of guilt may truly be characterized as "overwhelming." Moreover, the appellant's statement that he acted in self-defense was severely impeached by the physical evidence at the scene, rendering it completely unworthy of belief by a reasonable person. In such a situation, the error herein was not prejudicial to appellant's case, and I agree the conviction should be affirmed.