Court Opinion

ID: 9587412
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:21:50.16442+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:05.756247
License: Public Domain

PARKS, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
I must dissent to the main opinion for the reason that I find that the evidence warranted instructions of self-defense. The main opinion asserts that appellant was the aggressor and discounts the testimony of Jerry Crockett. It also overlooks the testimony of Rose Mary Gamblin who stated that she saw two men confronting the smaller (which would have been appellant) of the three and the smallest being punched by the tallest (Ted Jay). The testimony of the residents from Virginia Drive was consistent of having heard the squealing of tires and then yelling and cussing among the three men.
The instructions concerning self-defense would allow the jury to determine who was the aggressor and which witnesses were more credible. They would have informed the jury the rules for determining who had the right to use force and the amount of force which would have been allowed.
This Court has held many times as the main opinion sets forth that the instructions on a defendant’s defense must be given when supported by the evidence. Green v. State, 611 P.2d 262 (Okl.Cr.1980) and Carter v. State, 560 P.2d 994 (Okl.Cr. *10881977). Since there was evidence of self-defense, I believe that this case should be reversed in order that appellant's defense might be considered.