Long v. State
| Citation | 706 P.2d 915 |
| Decision Date | 18 September 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. F-83-549,F-83-549 |
| Parties | Jerry Artell LONG, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Jerry Artell Long was convicted in three separate cases of Robbery With Firearms, After Former Conviction of a Felony in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case Nos. CRF-82-3768, CRF-82-3769, and CRF-82-3857. He now appeals his sentence of twenty-five (25) years in the custody of the State Department of Corrections on each of the above cases.
Briefly stated the facts of these cases are that at appellant's preliminary hearing witnesses identified the appellant as the man who had committed armed robberies at a Piggly Wiggly store, a Braum's Ice Cream store and a Sonic Drive-In. After waiving a jury trial, appellant's request to be tried based on the trial court's reading of the preliminary hearing transcript was granted. Appellant's motion that the in-court identifications be suppressed was overruled.
In his sole assignment of error, appellant asserts that the trial court erred when it refused to suppress the robbery victims' in-court identifications of him. Appellant claims that his arrest was illegal and that the subsequent in-court identifications were "fruit of the poisonous tree" pursuant to Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963).
In the instant case, a witness from each of the stores identified the appellant as the person who had committed the particular robbery at their store. We are further satisfied from our review of the record that these in-court identifications of the appellant were based on independent recollections of the initial encounters. Therefore, we find United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463, 100 S.Ct. 1244, 63 L.Ed.2d 537 (1980) to be dispositive of this case. In United States v. Crews, supra, an in-court identification of the accused by the victim of a crime was held not suppressible as fruit of the accused's unlawful arrest where it was found that the witness' courtroom identification rested in an independent recollection of the initial encounter.
The appellant, however, has recognized the holding in United States v. Crews, supra, and requests this Court to disregard the Crews decision. Appellant reasons that such a result is possible if this Court applies a different standard to the Oklahoma Constitution, Art. II, Section 30 than the United States Supreme Court has applied to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution in United States v. Crews, supra.
We, however, are not favorably disposed toward setting up...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dennis v. State
...602 P.2d 237 (Okl.Cr.1979); Sartin v. State, 617 P.2d 219 (Okl.Cr.1980); Perez v. State, 614 P.2d 1112 (Okl.Cr.1980); Long v. State, 706 P.2d 915 (Okl.Cr.1985); State v. Neasbitt, 735 P.2d 337 (Okl.Cr.1987); Tilley v. State, 963 P.2d 607, 614 ¶ 4 Just eight (8) months ago, this Court reaffi......
-
Moore v. State
...Oklahoma Constitution. The Court ignores our previous decisions in DeGraff v. State, 2 Okl.Cr. 519, 103 P. 538 (1909), and Long v. State, 706 P.2d 915 (Okl.Cr.1985). In addition, the Court finds that pursuant to the decision in Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okl.Cr.1988), the Aguilar- Spine......
-
Gomez v. State
...is almost an exact copy of the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States. . . ." Long v. State, 1985 OK CR 119, ¶ 6, 706 P.2d 915, 917 (quoting DeGraff v. State, 2 Okl. Cr. 519, 103 P. 538 2000 OK CR 13, ¶ 10, 6 P.3d at 1057. ¶ 5 In Long, this Court specifically rejected a r......
-
Stewart v. State
...Court has held that Article II, Section 30 gives no greater protection than the Fourth Amendment. Long v. State , 1985 OK CR 119, ¶ 6, 706 P.2d 915, 916–17.¶5 The opinion holds that compliance with the statute, plus an individual determination of probable cause based on the totality of the ......