O'Connor v. Okla. State Conference of the Naacp

• Decision Date: 25 August 2022
• Docket Number: Case No. CQ-2022-418
• Parties: John M. O'CONNOR, in his official capacity as Oklahoma Attorney General ; David Prater, in his official capacity as District Attorney of Oklahoma County, Appellant - Defendants, v. OKLAHOMA STATE CONFERENCE OF the NAACP, Appellee - Plaintiff.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

516 P.3d 1164

John M. O'CONNOR, in his official capacity as Oklahoma Attorney General ; David Prater, in his official capacity as District Attorney of Oklahoma County, Appellant - Defendants,
v.
OKLAHOMA STATE CONFERENCE OF the NAACP, Appellee - Plaintiff.

Case No. CQ-2022-418

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Filed August 25, 2022

APPEARANCES FOR APPELLANTS – DEFENDANTS

MITHUN MANSINGHANI, SOLICITOR GENERAL, ANDY N. FERGUSON, ZACHARY PAUL WEST, ASSISTANT SOLICITORS GENERAL, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA — LITIGATION DEPARTMENT, 313 NE 21ST STREET, OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105

APPEARANCES FOR APPELLEE – PLAINTIFF

BENJAMIN ADAM GIFFORD, MARY B. MCCORD, JOSEPH W. MEAD, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER, INSTITUTE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL ADVOCACY AND PROTECTION, 600 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20001

OPINION ANSWERING CERTIFIED QUESTIONS OF LAW

ROWLAND, PRESIDING JUDGE:

¶1 Before the Court is an Order from The Honorable Carolyn B. McHugh, Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, certifying the following questions of law:

1. Does Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1312(5) apply only to individuals who are guilty of participating in a riot and who unlawfully obstruct a roadway while participating in such riot?

2. Does Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1320.12 impose liability only on organizations that have been found guilty of conspiring with others to violate one of Oklahoma's specifically enumerated anti-riot laws?

¶2 This Court has authority to respond to such requests from the federal court pursuant to the Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act. 20 O.S.2011, § 1601. See also Moore v. Gibson , 2001 OK CR 8, ¶ 6, 27 P.3d 483, 485 ("This Court has the power to give the present state of the law as well as use the opportunity to create new precedents in answering a certified question of law."). We accept the certified questions as presented and answer both in the affirmative.

1. BACKGROUND

¶3 During the 2021 First Regular Session, the Oklahoma Legislature enacted House Bill 1674, amending, in Section 1, 21 O.S.2011, § 1312 and enacting, in Section 3, new law codified at 21 O.S.Supp.2021, § 1320.12. Before the effective date of this legislation on November 1, 2021, Appellees instituted a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, challenging Sections 1 and 3 of House Bill 1674 on constitutional grounds.

¶4 Section 1, now at 21 O.S.Supp.2021, § 1312(5), provides that anyone who unlawfully obstructs the normal use of any public street, highway, or road may be punished by up to a year in jail and/or a fine. It also imposes liability for all damage to person or property resulting from such obstructing. Section 3, now at 21 O.S.Supp.2021, § 1320.12, imposes substantial fines for any organization found to be a conspirator with persons violating several enumerated sections of Title 21, generally having to do with riots, routs, or unlawful assemblies.

2. DISCUSSION

¶5 In determining whether these two challenged provisions apply only to individuals or organizations otherwise engaged in riot-related violations of the law, we employ familiar rules of statutory construction. Our ultimate goal is...