Legal Opinion

Hall v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided October 9, 1957No. A-12411PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

In the opinion above (May 5, 1957, 312 P.2d 981), it was pointed out that at trial counsel for the defendant Hall did not object to the instructions now for the first time complained of, and the giving of which it is said constituted fundamental error, and that defendant is entitled to raise the question as a basis for rehearing even at this late date. And even though, as stated in the opinion, no requested instructions were submitted to the court. It is the duty of counsel, as an officer of the court, to aid the court in avoiding error in the trial of cases by insisting on the giving of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Cawley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1952
  2. Farley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1950
  3. Ballard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1939
  4. Lac Coarce v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1957
  5. Lockhart v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1914

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Smith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1971
  2. Watkins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1960
  3. Grizzle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
  4. Grizzle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
  5. Kissick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1972

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API