Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Carter v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided October 28, 1988No. F-85-241Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBussey, Judge

While I agree that this conviction must be reversed, I cannot join in the majority’s ultimate disposition of this case. Judge Parks is correct in pointing out that the information charged appellant under 21 O.S.1981, § 741(3): intent to hold a person to service against his will. The information was not amended, and that was the charge read to the jury in the State’s opening statement. This is a specific intent crime, and that element must be proved by the State. I must agree that the record does not support finding this element.

However, the jury was instructed under § 741(1): intent to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Minter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1942
  4. Anderson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API