Court Opinion

ID: 9601422
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:43:23.632724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:50:21.272017
License: Public Domain

BUSSEY, Justice
(concurring).
I am in accord with the conclusion reached by my learned colleague, Judge Johnson, and, while it might be argued that the bizarre facts and circumstances surrounding the homicide in the instant case would justify this Court in affirming the judgment and sentence, and making an exception to the well established rule that the trial court should not invade the province of the jury, such a conclusion would be another step leading to the destruction of the jury system.
In reversing and remanding this cause for a new trial we accord to this defendant only the right which the legislature, in its wisdom, grants to every person convicted of murder, to-wit: the right to have the jury determine whether the punishment shall be death, or imprisonment at hard labor in the State Penitentiary for life. See Tit. 21 O.S.A. § 707. The colloquy between the trial court and the foreman of the jury placed before them matters not germane to the issue of punishment, and undoubtedly influenced the verdict.