McGregor v. State
| Decision Date | 11 May 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. F-84-483,F-84-483 |
| Citation | 754 P.2d 1216 |
| Parties | Billy Keith McGREGOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
The appellant was found guilty of First Degree Murder (21 O.S.1981, § 701.7) and sentenced to death in the District Court of Hughes County, Case No. CRF-83-58.
On May 13, 1983, Virgie Iona Plumb took the appellant into her home as a boarder. Nine days later, she was murdered by him.
The first assignment of error alleges that the appellant was denied a fair trial and effective assistance of counsel because the trial court refused to appoint a psychiatrist or psychologist to evaluate the appellant. One year after this case was tried, the United States Supreme Court in Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985), held that when a defendant demonstrates to the trial judge that his sanity at the time of the offense is to be a significant factor at trial, the State must, at a minimum, assure the defendant access to a competent psychiatrist who will conduct an appropriate examination and assist in evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense.
On September 24, 1986, this Court remanded Case No. F-84-483 (Case No. CRF-83-58 below) to the District Court of Hughes County for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the petitioner was entitled to a court-appointed psychiatrist under the holding of Ake. On remand, this Court directed that the hearing be held ex parte without the presence of the district attorney, following the United States Supreme Court direction when that Court concluded that an ex parte hearing be provided a defendant under similar circumstances. See McGregor v. State of Oklahoma, District Court of Hughes County, 733 P.2d 416 (Okl.Cr.1987).
The intention of the majority of the Ake Court that such hearings be held ex parte is manifest from the following passage:
The risk of error from denial of such assistance, as well as its probable value, are most predictably at their height when the defendant's mental condition is seriously in question. When the defendant is able to make an ex parte threshold showing to the trial court that his sanity is likely to be a significant factor in his defense, the need for assistance of a psychiatrist is readily apparent.... In such a circumstance, where the potential accuracy of the jury's determination is so dramatically...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McGregor v. State
...v. State, 733 P.2d 416 (Okl.Cr.1987). After the evidentiary hearing, this Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, McGregor v. State, 754 P.2d 1216 (Okl.Cr.1988).2 The day after Plumb's disappearance, McGregor tried unsuccessfully to cash two checks she had written him. Police first lea......
-
Banks v. State, PC-89-1073
...sanity at the time of the offense is to be a significant factor at trial and thus the need for an expert witness. See McGregor v. State, 754 P.2d 1216 (Okl.Cr.1988). However, the Court in McGregor relied not on the holding in Ake but merely an inference that an ex parte hearing is required ......
-
McGregor v. Gibson, 99-7038
...68 (1985), McGregor's conviction and death sentence were reversed by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. McGregor v. Oklahoma, 754 P.2d 1216, 1218 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988) (holding that McGregor was entitled to a court-appointed psychiatrist because a "[s]ufficient showing [was]... made ......
-
McGregor v. Gibson
...under Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985), that Mr. McGregor was entitled to a court-appointed psychiatrist. See McGregor v. State, 754 P.2d 1216, 1218 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). That reversal came after an evidentiary hearing revealed Mr. McGregor had a long and extensive history of mental i......