Brumfield v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
LUMPKIN, V. P.J.: concur in part, dissent in part.
T1 I concur with the outcome the Court reaches today, insofar as it affirms Appellant's conviction and sentence for Aggravated Manufacture of a Controlled Dangerous Substance and reverses Count II, following the State's concession of error. However, I dissent to the Court's reasoning, which includes lengthy dicta on proposition one concerning the "knock and announce" issue and a so-called "more expansive" interpretation of our state statutes and constitution than that available vis-a-vis the federal constitution's fourth amendment. I find…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hudson v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- De Graff v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
- Turner v. City of LawtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
- Long v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
- Dennis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.