Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Wallace v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided March 27, 1995No. C-91-309Published

1Concurrence

CHAPEL, Vice Presiding Judge,

specially concurring:

I believe a competent defendant in a capital case can waive his right to direct appeal.1 However, I cannot agree with the majority’s reliance on Cooper v. State2 and the discussion regarding due process which is contained in dicta in the Cooper opinion. In Cooper I concurred in result without writing because of the analysis of the Due Process Clause. I now find Cooper cited here for that purpose, and I must write to state my disagreement with the analysis in Cooper.

This issue is not before us; this Court need not attempt to precisely delineate…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  4. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  5. Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

35 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