Hames v. State

I respectfully dissent. I am puzzled by the majority’s determination that the trial court properly denied appellant a jury instruction on proximate cause. Denying him of his requested instruction stripped appellant of his defense.

The majority properly states that an accused is entitled to an instruction on any theory of defense if it finds possible support in the evidence, even if that evidence is discredited. Broaddrick v. State, 706 P.2d 534 (Okl.Cr.1985). However, contrary to the majority’s determination, competent evidence existed to support appellant’s theory. First, the accident…