T. R. M. v. State

Decision Date22 June 1979
Docket NumberNo. J-78-287,J-78-287
PartiesT. R. M., A Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

T. R. M., a juvenile, was charged in the Juvenile Division of the District Court, Texas County, Oklahoma, Case No. JFJ-78-16 with having committed acts which would be Assault With Intent to Commit Rape, if committed by an adult, and Possession of Marihuana, if committed by an adult. The court found T. R. M. to be a delinquent at the conclusion of the adjudicatory hearing, finding the evidence sufficient to support the charge of Assault With Intent to Commit Rape, but insufficient to support the charge of Possession of Marihuana. The juvenile's attorney filed a motion to vacate the findings, the order and judgment on the ground the judge was biased and prejudiced against the juvenile. The judge overruled the motion and at the disposition hearing ordered the juvenile committed to the care, custody and control of the Oklahoma Department of Institutions, Social and Rehabilitative Services for placement in the State training school for boys at Helena, Oklahoma. From these proceedings the juvenile has perfected this appeal.

At the time of the incident hereinafter described, T. R. M. was 16 years of age and a junior in high school where he was an average student. He played first team defensive tackle on the high school football team and weighed about 195 pounds. T. S. W., the complaining witness, was 18 years of age, valedictorian of her senior class in high school and was employed as a secretary in a law firm during her senior year until March of 1978. She stated she dated L. W.; that she had known him for about a year and a half and had dated him more or less steadily since September, 1977. She testified she had never talked with T. R. M. before but had seen him at school and around town. The juvenile also testified that he had never talked with the complaining witness before but just knew her by name and face.

T. S. W. testified that on April 11, 1978, at approximately 11:00 p. m., she was driving home alone in her car when she determined that she was being followed by another car that was blinking its lights. She pulled over to see if anything was wrong with her car, and the juvenile, who was driving the other vehicle, pulled in back of her. He got out of his car and came to the driver's side of her car. At this time, L. W., the complaining witness' boyfriend, drove by without stopping.

T. R. M. asked the complaining witness if she wanted to "get high." She declined and he said that she ought to at least come look at his car stereo before she left. T. S. W. agreed, thinking that this would enable her to terminate the encounter. She left her car running and walked back to T. R. M.' § car. She was standing by the open door on the driver's side when the juvenile pushed her into his car. T. S. W. testified that she noticed a clear plastic bag and a pipe in his car. She grabbed for the door handle on the passenger side, and T. R. M. grabbed her around the neck and pulled away from the curb at a high rate of speed.

As they were on the way out of town, the complaining witness asked T. R. M. to take her back to her car because it was still running and then to take her back to town because she had to go to the bathroom. T. R. M. refused. She opened the passenger door of the moving vehicle in order to escape, and the juvenile took both hands off the steering wheel, grabbing her around the neck with one arm and around the waist with the other. She ceased to struggle and told T. R. M. to just drive because they were going to have a wreck. In response to her request to be taken someplace where she could get away, the complaining witness testified that T. R. M. made statements such as, "But I want you. I want you, . . ."; and, "I can't help it. I want you. I need you."

The juvenile stopped his car out in the country on a dirt road which was referred to as the "junk yard road." Shortly after the car stopped, both T. R. M. and the witness observed the lights of an approaching vehicle through the rear window. T. R. M. turned around, put the car in gear and began to drive away. The witness opened the door and started to jump out, and as she did T. R. M. grabbed her. T. R. M. accelerated the car, and the passenger door swung back, knocking her down. T. R. M. continued to hold onto her as she was dragged down the road. The car ran over her right leg and at this point T. R. M. released her and continued down the dirt road at a high rate of speed.

The witness jumped up, waved her arms and yelled at the approaching vehicle to stop. She then saw that it was L. W. He took her back to her car and then both drove to the Guymon police station. They reported the incident to Captain Joe Ferguson, and each made a written statement. Captain Ferguson testified that T. S. W. was in a hysterical state. Her jeans were ripped on the right hip and her blouse was torn in front. He observed abrasions on her right knee and along...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Frederick v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • 21 Noviembre 2001
    ...judge may not have an opinion as to the defendant's guilt or innocence, or may not be prejudiced against the crime charged. See T.R.M. v. State, 1979 OK CR 59, ¶ 10, 596 P.2d 902, 905. "[T]here is a general presumption of impartiality on the part of judges as to matters before them." Pittma......
  • Bryan v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • 4 Marzo 1997
    ...P.2d 1349, 1353 (Okl.Cr.1987). 37 Carter v. State, 560 P.2d 994, 996-97 (Okl.Cr.1977). 38 Stouffer, 738 P.2d at 1353; T.R.M. v. State, 596 P.2d 902, 905 (Okl.Cr.1979). 39 Wilkett v. State, 674 P.2d 573 (Okl.Cr.1984) (trial court expressed resentment of defendant, accused trial counsel of di......
  • Fitzgerald v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • 10 Diciembre 1998
    ...involved the use or threat of violence to the person).15 Arnold v. State, 1990 OK CR 78, 803 P.2d 1145, 1148-49; T.R.M. v. State, 1979 OK CR 59, 596 P.2d 902, 905.16 Bryan, 935 P.2d at 355.17 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985).18 22 O.S.Supp.1997, § 1355.4(D).19 Ake, 470 U.S.......
  • Stouffer v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • 18 Mayo 1987
    ...the judge's decision absent a showing of abuse of that discretion. Filgueras v. State, 668 P.2d 1172 (Okl.Cr.1983); T.R.M. v. State, 596 P.2d 902 (Okl.Cr.1979); and, Lemmon v. State, 538 P.2d 596, 601 (Okl.Cr.1975). The party alleging an abuse of discretion must demonstrate that the trial j......
  • 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