Legal Opinion · Dissent

Golden v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided January 10, 2006No. F2004-582Published

1Dissent

LUMPKIN, Vice-Presiding Judge:

Dissenting.

¶ 1 I dissent to the Court’s decision to suddenly mandate that it is “structural error” when a defendant is denied the “complete array of peremptory challenges to which he was entitled by Oklahoma law” and thus beyond the possibility of ever being considered harmless under the facts of the case — even when defense counsel makes no attempt to preserve the error or complain about the jury. It is readily apparent there is a lack of understanding as to what constitutes a “structural” error under current jurisprudence and what the misuse of that term can…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Powers v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Rose v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

8 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