Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

McArthur v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided October 26, 1993No. F-88-986Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLumpkin, Presiding Judge

I concur with the Court’s decision to affirm the Appellant’s convictions in Count I and Count III and the modification of the sentence in Count I. However, while I agree with the Court’s application of the authority set forth in 22 O.S.Supp.1990, § 1066, I find the evidence is sufficient pursuant to our prior caselaw to affirm the conviction of Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon.

The Court adopts the holding in State v. Suniville, 741 P.2d 961 (Utah 1987), as the analysis applicable to 21 O.S.1981, § 801. The Supreme Court of Utah determined that a “subjective” analysis could not be utilized to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Spuehler v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
  2. State v. SunivilleUtah Supreme Court · 1987
  3. State v. HannaCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1975
  4. Wilson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1981
  5. Karlin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API