Legal Opinion · Dissent

LaFortune v. District Court of Tulsa County

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided December 11, 1998No. Nos. P 98-505, P 98-506Published

1Dissent

LUMPKIN, Judge:

Dissent.

¶ 1 I must respectfully dissent to the Court’s decision in this ease. I cannot join in the labyrinth analysis which disregards pertinent facts upon which this decision is based and voids a properly enacted legislative procedure to achieve a result not intended.

¶ 2 The order omits setting out the fact that the preliminary hearing in each of these cases was not conducted pursuant to the automatic termination procedure set out in 22 O.S.Supp.1994, § 258 (Sixth). In each case, the State called its witnesses and rested. Thereafter, in Case No. P-98-506, the defendant made a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Beaird v. RameyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1969
  2. McLaughlin v. District Court of Delaware CountyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1996
  3. State v. MartinCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API