Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hain v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided April 29, 1993No. F-88-466Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

LUMPKIN, Presiding Judge:

concurring in part/dissenting in part.

I concur in this Court’s determination the convictions for murder, kidnapping, arson and larceny of an automobile should be affirmed; and the convictions for robbery with firearms should be reversed. I dissent to the Court’s determination the case should be remanded for resentencing, using the life-without-parole option.

This Court in its holding cites “principals [sic] of fundamental fairness” in reversing for a new second-stage trial. Ante at 753. This puts me in a quandary, for how does one dissent to principles of fundamental…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Kring v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  3. United States v. Edwin A. Towne, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
  4. Allen v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1991
  5. Penn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1917

9 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