Clark v. State, F-80-239

Decision Date23 February 1981
Docket NumberNo. F-80-239,F-80-239
Citation625 P.2d 119
PartiesMonte Robert CLARK Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee,
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

Appellant, Monte Robert Clark, was convicted by a jury of Attempted Rape, 21 O.S.1971, §§ 42 and 1114, and sentenced to two (2) years imprisonment. On appeal he first asserts that the evidence was insufficient. This proposition is without merit.

Where the state establishes a prima facie case, the evidence is not insufficient as a matter of law, and conflicts in the evidence raise questions of fact for the jury. Hunt v. State, Okl.Cr., 601 P.2d 464 (1979). The testimony of the complaining witness was that appellant got into her vehicle uninvited at a convenience store in Norman, Oklahoma, on the evening of May 7, 1979, and insisted that she give him a ride to his home. When she stopped her vehicle and turned off the ignition at the residence indicated by appellant, he grabbed the keys. He slid next to the victim, squeezed her breast and crotch roughly, and told her they were going to have sex. Appellant took off his shirt and exposed himself. He tried repeatedly to pull her down on the car seat or pull her from the vehicle, but she clung to the steering wheel. He showed her a ring with which he claimed to have knocked a named person's teeth out, and finally produced a butcher knife which he pointed at her. The witness ultimately escaped on foot.

After being warned of his rights, appellant was asked by a police officer summoned to the scene whether he had tried to rape a woman, and he replied "Hell, yeah, I tried to get some." We are convinced that the evidence produced by the state clearly made out a prima facie case of attempted rape.

Appellant's second contention that there was no evidence that the victim was not the wife of appellant is directedly refuted in the record. The complaining witness specifically testified that she was not, nor ever had been, married to the appellant (Tr. 72-73). This assignment of error is without merit.

As his third assignment of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Crawford v. Horton
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Oklahoma
    • April 25, 2012
    ...OK CR 294, 766 P.2d 365; Rosteck v. State, 1988 OK CR 11, 749 P.2d 556; Williams v. State, 1983 OK CR 45, 661 P.2d 911; Clark v. State, 1981 OK CR 20, 625 P.2d 119; Reeves v.State, 1977 OK CR 143, 567 P.2d 503; Moulton v. State, 1970 OK CR 154, 476 P.2d 366 (in all cases the crime of attemp......
  • Heflin v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • October 7, 1982
    ...invalid. The granting of a deferred judgment or a suspended sentence is a matter left to the discretion of the trial court. Clark v. State, 625 P.2d 119 (Okl.Cr.1981). This Court has a history of refraining from disturbing that decision absent an abuse of discretion Neilson v. State, 639 P.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT