Garrett v. State, F--74--255
| Decision Date | 22 July 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. F--74--255,F--74--255 |
| Parties | Garry Don GARRETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
The appellant, Garry Don Garrett, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged by Information in the District Court of Bryan County, Oklahoma, with the crime of Forgery in the Second Degree, After Former Conviction of a Felony in Case No. CRF--73--170. Upon trial, the jury in a two stage proceeding found the defendant guilty as charged and assessed his punishment at a term of ten (10) years imprisonment in the state penitentiary. After judgment and sentence in accordance with said verdict, the defendant perfected his timely appeal.
Briefly stated, the evidence adduced at trial is as follows: Alvin D. Green, owner of a retail liquor business in Colbert, Oklahoma, identified State's Exhibit No. 1 as being a two party check in the amount of $12.00 which he cashed for the defendant on July 11, 1973, the same being written on the First National Bank of Durant. The maker of the check was one Jimmy Smith and the payee was the defendant. The witness further testified that the defendant endorsed the check in his presence and that the check was later returned marked 'No Account'. On subsequent cross-examination, Green stated that there was a Jimmy Smith who lived in Colbert.
Mr. Bert Weger related that on July 11, 1973, he was assistant cashier with the First National Bank of Durant, identified the $12.00 check drawn on his bank and stated that he could find no record of any account in the name of Jimmy Smith.
Bryan County Deputy Sheriff William A. Lilley identified State's Exhibit 2 as being a sample of the defendant's handwriting known as a London Letter Exemplar taken while the defendant was incarcerated in the county jail. Mr. Lilley testified that the defendant wrote the sample in his presence. Mr. Lilley also identified State's Exhibit 3 as being a subsequent London Letter Exemplar secured from the defendant on December 10, 1971. The witness stated that both samples had been forwarded to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.
The State's next witness, Bruce Plank, testified that he is employed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation as a Questioned Document Examiner. Agent Plank identified State's Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 as being documents that he had previously examined. Agent Plank related that in his opinion the individual who penned the writing on State's Exhibit 1, the check, both front and back, was the same person who gave the exemplars, State's Exhibits 2 and 3.
William Lilley was then recalled to the stand and explained the procedure he used to obtain the handwriting samples. The State then rested.
Mrs. Reatha Garrett, mother of the defendant, testified on behalf of her son relating that when she learned of the criminal charge pending against her son, she went to Mr. Al Green to see if she could make restitution to him in the amount of $12.00. Bert Weger was then recalled and testified that he did not know who wrote the check in question. The defendant did not testify in his own behalf.
Defendant's first proposition in error urges essentially that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to sustain the verdict of the jury. With this contention we cannot agree. A reading of the record as a whole reflects that there was sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence presented by the State to prove a prima facie case of the crime charged. See Hurley v. State, Okl.Cr., 416 P.2d 967. The jury then became the exclusive judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woolverton v. Multi-County Grand Jury Oklahoma County
...Mississippi, 394 U.S. 721, 89 S.Ct. 1394, 22 L.Ed.2d 676 (1969); Faulkner v. State, 646 P.2d 1304, 1307 (Okl.Cr.1982); Garrett v. State, 525 P.2d 1238, 1240 (Okl.Cr.1974). Moreover, the guidelines developed in Cole v. Parr, 595 P.2d 1349 (Okl.Cr.1979), do not apply to the taking of specimen......
-
Faulkner v. State
...one may properly be required to supply photographs, fingerprints and handwriting samples for identification purposes. See Garrett v. State, 525 P.2d 1238 (Okl.Cr.1974). The appellants' argument concerning Cole v. Parr, supra, will not be accepted by this Court. In Cole, we dealt with the si......
-
Dunford v. State, F-79-323
...to sustain the conviction. The appellate test of sufficiency is whether or not the State presented a prima facie case. Garrett v. State, Okl.Cr., 525 P.2d 1238 (1974); Hunt v. State, Okl.Cr., 601 P.2d 464 (1979). The elements of forgery are the existence of a false or materially altered wri......
-
Lister v. State
...rights of the defendant. For Oklahoma cases holding the same, see Smith v. State, Okl.Cr., 462 P.2d 328 (1969) and Garrett v. State, Okl.Cr., 525 P.2d 1238 (1974). Accordingly, we find the first proposition to be without Defendant next asserts that reversible error occurred when the court o......