Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Brumfield v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided March 20, 2007No. F-2005-952Published

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

  1. Hudson v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  2. De Graff v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
  3. Turner v. City of LawtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
  4. Long v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
  5. Dennis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1999

1 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