Court Opinion

ID: 9557573
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 16:52:36.524377+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:01.109628
License: Public Domain

BRETT, Judge
(concurs in part and dissents in part).
I concur that defendant in this case committed an aggravated assault and battery under the provisions of 21 O.S.1971, § 645, but the prosecuting witness’ own testimony shows that defendant did not have the intent to kill as alleged in the information. On direct examination the prosecuting witness testified concerning what the defendant did as follows: “She stayed in the same spot and when I hit the ground I was looking right at her and she had the gun still in her hand aiming it at me.” The witness related that he got up and started to his car and then said, “She stayed in her tracks until I turned my ignition key on and she started towards the car that she drove up in.”
If defendant had had the intent to kill the witness, she would have shot him while he was on the ground. There is no doubt whatsoever but that the defendant did shoot and injure the witness, but the prosecution should have been laid under 21 O.S. 1971, § 645, for aggravated assault and *153battery. Therefore, I believe that justice requires that this sentence should be modified from 10 years confinement in the State Penitentiary, to one of 1 year for the aggravated assault and battery.