Hall v. State, No. F--75--194

CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Writing for the CourtBLISS; BRETT, P.J., and BUSSEY
Citation538 P.2d 1113
Docket NumberNo. F--75--194
Decision Date18 July 1975
PartiesPercy HALL, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

Page 1113

538 P.2d 1113
Percy HALL, Jr., Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
No. F--75--194.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.
July 18, 1975.

John W. Dewitt, Idabel, for appellant.

Larry Derryberry, Atty. Gen., James L. Swartz, Asst. Atty. Gen., David O'Brien, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Page 1115

OPINION

BLISS, Judge.

The appellant, Percy Hall, Jr., hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged, tried before a jury in a two-stage proceeding and convicted in the District Court of McCurtain County of the crime of Burglary in the Second Degree After Former Conviction of a Felony. Punishment was assessed at a term of ten (10) years under the direction and control of the Department of Corrections of the State of Oklahoma. From a judgment and sentence in conformance with the verdict, the defendant has perfected his timely appeal.

Briefly stated the evidence adduced at trial is as follows: Ed Frazier, the owner of the Black Hat Club located west of Idabel, testified that he closed the club about 2:30 a.m. on Sunday the 23rd day of September, 1974, and did not return until the next Tuesday afternoon when he found that there had been a break-in and money taken from the vending machines and cash register. A guitar and a collection of small change were also missing. He did not know the defendant and had not given the defendant permission to enter the building.

Sandra Hankins then testified that she was employed at the club and worked on Saturday night and helped close. She opened up the club on Tuesday afternoon and discovered that the paneling by the back door had been kicked-in and money trays removed from the vending machines and pool table and money gone from both cash registers. She further testified that a dress which she had left at the club on Saturday night was missing and that she next saw it in the Sheriff's office.

McCurtain County Undersheriff G. D. Roath testified that during the investigation of the break-in he interviewed the defendant in Clarksville, Texas, and later in Idabel and that prior to any interrogation of the defendant he had advised him of his Miranda rights. At this point the trial court conducted a hearing outside the presence of the jury concerning the admission of the defendant's purported confession. Roath testified that he took the defendant to the District Attorney's office and that the defendant was again read the Miranda warning. The defendant was asked specifically if he understood each of the rights and he replied that he knew 'all about that kind of stuff' and agreed to talk to them. The jury was then recalled and Roath further testified that the defendant stated that he and another had broken into the building and took the money trays from the machines, some money from under the counter and a guitar, and that they later threw the money trays and other items into an empty field. All items were subsequently recovered, including a dress used to carry the trays. All recovered items, including the dress and guitar, were introduced into evidence. On cross-examination the witness stated that he had been told where the items had been thrown by someone other than the defendant and denied that he had threatened to lock up the defendant's wife if the defendant did not make a statement. The State then rested.

The defendant then called Vera Hall who testified that she was the defendant's wife and that on the night in question she was with her husband at all times and that they had not gone to the Black Hat Club. She further stated that she was with the defendant when he was transported from Clarksville to Idabel and that Roath had told the defendant if he didn't admit that he had something to do with the break-in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • State v. Curlew
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1983
    ...8 Oklahoma law once provided that a confession or admission of a defendant was inadmissible to prove the corpus delicti. Hall v. State, 538 P.2d 1113, 1117 (Okl.Cr.App.1975). In Jones v. State, 555 P.2d 63, 68 (Okl.Cr.App.1976), the Oklahoma Appeals Court overruled Hall and adopted the rule......
  • Parks v. State, No. F-79-3
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • August 26, 1982
    ...consequently, it's Murder One or nothing. (Tr. 543) See also, DeLaune v. State, 569 P.2d 463 (Okl.Cr.App.1977) quoting Hall v. State, 538 P.2d 1113, 117 ... The general rule is that in every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delecti beyond a reasonable d......
  • Jones v. State, No. F--76--399
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 30, 1976
    ...confession being admitted merely for the purpose of connecting the accused with the offense charged.' Finally in Hall v. State, Okl.Cr., 538 P.2d 1113 (1975) we state the so-called 'general '(I)n every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delicti beyond a r......
  • DeLaune v. State, No. F-76-768
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 13, 1977
    ...with proof of the crime's corpus delicti the substantive fact that a crime has been committed. As we stated in Hall v. State, Okl.Cr., 538 P.2d 1113, 1117 ". . . The general rule is that in every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delicti beyond a reasona......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • State v. Curlew
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1983
    ...8 Oklahoma law once provided that a confession or admission of a defendant was inadmissible to prove the corpus delicti. Hall v. State, 538 P.2d 1113, 1117 (Okl.Cr.App.1975). In Jones v. State, 555 P.2d 63, 68 (Okl.Cr.App.1976), the Oklahoma Appeals Court overruled Hall and adopted the rule......
  • Parks v. State, No. F-79-3
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • August 26, 1982
    ...consequently, it's Murder One or nothing. (Tr. 543) See also, DeLaune v. State, 569 P.2d 463 (Okl.Cr.App.1977) quoting Hall v. State, 538 P.2d 1113, 117 ... The general rule is that in every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delecti beyond a reasonable d......
  • Jones v. State, No. F--76--399
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 30, 1976
    ...confession being admitted merely for the purpose of connecting the accused with the offense charged.' Finally in Hall v. State, Okl.Cr., 538 P.2d 1113 (1975) we state the so-called 'general '(I)n every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delicti beyond a r......
  • DeLaune v. State, No. F-76-768
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • September 13, 1977
    ...with proof of the crime's corpus delicti the substantive fact that a crime has been committed. As we stated in Hall v. State, Okl.Cr., 538 P.2d 1113, 1117 ". . . The general rule is that in every criminal prosecution the burden rests on the State to prove the corpus delicti beyond a reasona......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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