952 P.2d 994 (Okla.Crim.App. 1997), PC-96-1410, Humphreys v. State

Docket NºPC-96-1410.
Citation952 P.2d 994
Party NameJackie Eugene HUMPHREYS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Respondent.
Case DateDecember 05, 1997
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Page 994

952 P.2d 994 (Okla.Crim.App. 1997)

Jackie Eugene HUMPHREYS, Petitioner,

v.

STATE of Oklahoma, Respondent.

No. PC-96-1410.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

December 5, 1997.

Page 995

Shannan Arbabi, Capital Post-Conviction Division, Oklahoma Indigent Defense System, Norman, for Petitioner.

OPINION DENYING APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF AND REQUEST FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING

STRUBHAR, Vice Presiding Judge:

Jackie Eugene Humphreys, Petitioner, was tried by jury in the District Court of Okmulgee County, Case No. CRF-87-5001, before the Honorable Anne Moroney, District Judge, and convicted of Murder in the first degree 1 for the death of Bessie Phipps. The jury found three (3) aggravating circumstances 2 and recommended death. The trial court sentenced Humphreys accordingly. Humphreys appealed his Judgment and Sentence to this Court and we affirmed his conviction for murder, but vacated the sentence of death and remanded the case for resentencing. Humphrey v. State, 864 P.2d 343 (Okl.Cr.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1077, 114 S.Ct. 1663, 128 L.Ed.2d 379 (1994). A new sentencing proceeding was conducted before the Honorable Franklin D. Rahhal. The jury again returned a sentence of death finding the same three aggravating circumstances as the original sentencing jury. 3 The trial court sentenced Humphreys to death and he appealed. This Court affirmed the Judgment and Sentence of the trial court on October 10, 1997. Humphreys v. State, 947 P.2d 565 (Okl.Cr.1997).

On August 8, 1997, Humphreys filed in this Court an original application for post-conviction relief together with a request for an evidentiary hearing. 4 The claims that may be raised, as well as our scope of review, in this matter are narrowly defined as follows:

The only issues that can be raised in post-conviction are those which were not or could not have been raised in a direct appeal and support a conclusion either that the outcome of the trial would have been different but for the errors or that the defendant is factually innocent. On review, this Court must determine whether controverted, previously unresolved factual issues material to the legality of the applicant's confinement exist, whether the applicant's grounds were or could have been previously raised, and whether relief may be granted.... This Court will not consider an issue which was raised on direct appeal and is therefore...

To continue reading

Request your trial