Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rea v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided October 3, 2001No. F-2000-1452Published

1DissentChapel, J.

11 I concur in the majority's decision affirming Rea's conviction. I believe Rea's sentence is disproportionate and would modify. I disagree with the majority's refusal to adopt a proportionality standard of review for excessive sentence claims. I have previously indicated I believe a proportionality standard is both fair and appropriate.1 I do not see why the majority relies on the People v. Milbourn2 explanation that appellate sentence review must respect and give purpose to the legislature's sentencing scheme. I agree that legislatures define punishments. I agree that our state legislature…

2Cases cited81 opinions

  1. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. State v. LobatoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1992
  5. State v. RothSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984

76 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