Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Boltz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided January 7, 1991No. F-84-765Published

1Concurrence

PARKS, Presiding Judge,

specially concurring:

Initially, I feel compelled to address appellant’s sixteenth assignment wherein he contends that the “continuing threat” aggravating circumstance is vague and that Oklahoma has provided no definitive guidance on what must be proved to establish the same. Specifically, I am concerned with the definition of “society” as it relates to this aggravating circumstance and whether the “sheer callousness” in which a murder was committed can support a jury’s finding that a defendant constitutes a continuing threat.

The majority herein correctly states that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Foster v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1986
  2. Green v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1985
  3. Nguyen v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1988
  4. Foster v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1989
  5. Rudd v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1982

2 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