Court Opinion

ID: 9791606
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:14:27.474074+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:37.168161
License: Public Domain

LUMPKIN, Presiding Judge,
concurring in results.
I concur in the results reached by the Court in this case. However, I disagree with the Court’s failure to strictly construe and apply the provisions of 22 O.S.1991, § 860, together with our prior decision in Williams v. State, 794 P.2d 759 (Okl.Cr.1990). Section 860 does not distinguish between a situation where an individual is charged only with a primary offense or if the primary offense is enhanced by prior convictions of a felony. The result should be the same. If the prior conviction is an element of the primary offense, it should be tried as a part of the guilt stage of trial. In Williams, the Court sought to clarify the procedure set forth by Section 860 and to overrule those court-created procedures which disregarded the provisions of Section 860. While Williams sought to remove the confusion surrounding the procedure to follow in cases of this type, I fear the Court is now charting a new course which will again ultimately create confusion as to the procedure which should be followed. To preclude that state of confusion from redeveloping as to the application of Section 860, I would apply our decision in Williams, regardless of the number of Counts which may be charged.