Court Opinion

ID: 9573152
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:48:41.564938+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:37:36.838941
License: Public Domain

LUMPKIN, Vice Presiding Judge,
specially concurring:
I join with the Court’s decision in this cáse and agree that the trial judge addressed the issue of impeachment of Appellant’s testimony by prior felony convictions in an exemplary manner. Judge Parr formulated his resolution of this evidentiary issue without the benefit of our decision in Hardiman v. State, 798 P.2d 222 (Okl.Cr.1990). However, the solution appropriately balanced the need of the State to be able to present evidence which allowed the jury to determine the credibility of the Appellant without injecting prejudicial information into the trial.