Jamison v. State, A-12364
| Decision Date | 05 December 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. A-12364,A-12364 |
| Citation | 304 P.2d 371 |
| Parties | Tillman JAMISON, Plaintiff in Error, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The right of an accused to have the jury kept together until after final submission and agreement upon a verdict or until discharged by the court is one which may be waived.
2. Fear, based upon threats alone unless accompanied by some overt act or demonstration designed to execute the threats, which furnished the defendant some reason to believe that he was in danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury at the hands of the deceased, will not support a plea of self defense and mitigate the homicide.
Appeal from the District Court of Pontotoc County; John Boyce McKeel, Judge.
Plaintiff in error, Tillman Jamison, was convicted of the crime of first degree manslaughter, sentenced to forty years in the state penitentiary, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Carloss Wadlington, Pat Holman, Ada, for plaintiff in error.
Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Plaintiff in error, Tillman Jamison, defendant below, was charged in the District Court of Pontotoc County, Oklahoma, by information with the commission of the crime of murder. In said information it was alleged that he did feloniously and unlawfully and with premeditated design take the life of one Horace Edmondson by shooting him with a .32 caliber Winchester rifle. He was tried by a jury, convicted of first degree manslaughter, and his punishment fixed at forty years in the penitentiary. Judgment and sentence were entered accordingly from which this appeal has been perfected.
First, the defendant urges that the trial court erred in permitting the jury to separate at the conclusion of the trial court's instructions, as reflected by the minutes, upon agreement by both sides 'that the jury may split up and go home'. Thereafter, the trial court administered to the jury the usual admonition to talk to no one or permit no one to talk to them concerning the case. The defendant urges that this action on the part of the trial court constitutes reversible error. This point has been adversely determined to the defendant's contention in Hobson v. State, Okl.Cr., 277 P.2d 695, wherein the court held that the right of a criminal defendant to have the jury kept together until after final submission and agreement upon a verdict or until discharged by the court is one which may be waived. From the transcript of the record it appears that the separation of the jury was by agreement of the defendant and his counsel and without objection. Under these conditions, the contention is without merit.
The defendant further urges...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leach v. State
...at trial to the absence or sufficiency of an admonition to the jury but prior to submission amounted to a waiver. See also Jamison v. State, 304 P.2d 371 (Okl.Cr.1956) where it was held that the right to have the jury remain together after they had begun deliberations may be waived by conse......
-
West v. State
...P. 171 (1928); Hood v. State, 70 Okl.Cr. 334, 106 P.2d 271 (1940); Anderson v. State, 90 Okl.Cr. 1, 209 P.2d 721 (1949); Jamison v. State, Okl.Cr., 304 P.2d 371 (1956). Fear alone is not enough to justify one person to take the life of another. Such fear must have been induced by some overt......
-
McDonald v. State, F-85-403
...into an aggressor. See Commission Comment to OUJI-CR-749 (1981). See also Ruth v. State, 581 P.2d 919 (Okl.Cr.1978); Jamison v. State, 304 P.2d 371, 372 (Okl.Cr.1956). Because the evidence of the verbal exchange between Fuller and appellant could not have rendered appellant an aggressor, an......
-
In re Adoption of the 2017 Revisions to the Okla. Unif. Jury Instructions-Criminal
...57, 372 P.2d 243 (Okl. Cr. 1962) ; nor may a homicide be justified because of threats or insults by the decedent, Jamison v. State, 1956 OK CR 127, 304 P.2d 371 (Okl. Cr. 1956) ; Fields v. State, 1947 OK CR 126, 85 Okl. Cr. 439, 188 P.2d (1948) ; Ging v. State, 1925 OK CR 461, 31 Okl. Cr. 4......