Legal Opinion · Dissent

Delong v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Department of Public Safety

Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided February 24, 1998No. 89911Published

1DissentCarol M. Hansen, Judge

¶ 1 The majority fails to quote 12 O.S. 1991 § 2410. That statute is clear and unambiguous on its face. It provides, in relevant part:

A. ... evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea ...: (Emphasis added).

[[Image here]]

2. a plea of nolo contendere;1

¶2 The majority ignores the plain language of this statute and instead relies on the Sixth Circuit’s flawed reasoning in Walker v. Schaeffer, 854 F.2d 138 (6th Cir.1988)(Walker). In my view this reliance is ill-founded. I therefore dissent.

¶ 3 State’s contention before…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Doak Walker and Maurice Turner v. R. Schaeffer, Patrolman, and J. Sheridan, PatrolmanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
  2. Lichon v. American Universal InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Cox v. DawsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1996
  4. First State Bank v. Diamond Plastics Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  5. Irwin v. SWO Acquisition Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1992

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