Vickers v. State, F--74--839

Decision Date15 July 1975
Docket NumberNo. F--74--839,F--74--839
Citation538 P.2d 1134
PartiesRonnie Gene VICKERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

BLISS, Judge:

Appellant, Ronnie Gene Vickers, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged with another, tried and convicted alone by a jury in the District Court, Oklahoma County, Case No. CRF--74--466, for the offense of Unlawful Distribution of a Controlled Dangerous Substance, Marihuana, in violation of 63 O.S.1971, § 2--401. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and assessed his punishment at two (2) years' imprisonment and a fine of One Thousand ($1,000.00) Dollars. From said judgment and sentence a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

Officer Thomas Huey, of the Edmond Police Department, testified for the State that on January 22, 1974, he was acting as an undercover narcotics agent. Huey stated that he was approached by a Kenneth Fennel in Smitty's Bar in Edmond, Oklahoma, to purchase some marihuana. According to Heuy, Fennel led him to the parking lot where they entered an automobile in which the defendant was seated. The defendant occupied the driver's seat, Huey occupied the passenger's seat, and Fennel was in the right rear seat. Huey described the transaction which ensued. The defendant raised a towel covering the console of the car and produced a plastic baggie containing a green leafy substance. He handed the baggie to Huey and requested $10.00. Huey gave the defendant a $20.00 bill which the defendant was unable to change. The three then proceeded in defendant's car to obtain change which Fennel procured at the Eight Ball Lounge. Fennel gave the defendant and Huey $10.00 each. Huey testified that later in the evening he marked the plastic baggie containing the green leafy substance and gave it to his superior, Lieutenant Faulkner.

Don Faulkner, Assistant Chief of Police at Edmond, Oklahoma, testified that Officer Huey turned over to him a plastic baggie containing a green leafy substance which he placed in an Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation envelope and transported it to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation for analysis.

By stipulation of counsel, the State related that Ann G. Reed, forensic chemist of the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, if called, would testify that her chemical analysis of the substance received from Faulkner was marihuana.

The State then rested.

The defendant, testifying on his own behalf, stated that on the night in question he had been at Fennel's house where he placed several baggies containing marihuana in the console of his car. The defendant stated that he took the marihuana as payment for a debt owed to him by Fennel, and had no intention of selling it. The defendant related this version of the incident. Upon reaching Smitty's Bar, Fennel entered into a conversation with Huey and in the latter's presence Fennel asked the defendant whether he should sell Huey a baggie of marihuana. The defendant replied that the marihuana was Fennel's and to do with it as he wished. Defendant then went outside to his automobile. While there, Fennel and Huey came out and proceeded to get into defendant's automobile. According to the defendant, Huey handed him a baggie which defendant handed to Fennel and Fennel rolled a 'joint.' The baggie was handed back to defendant who returned it to Huey. The defendant testified he then took Fennel and Huey to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Hale v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • February 26, 1991
    ...and have a probable effect on the verdict. 22 O.S.1981, § 952; Bowen v. State, 715 P.2d 1093, 1101 (Okl.Cr.1984); Vickers v. State, 538 P.2d 1134, 1136 (Okl.Cr.1975). Petitioner bears the burden of proving the existence of a probability that the newly discovered evidence, if presented at tr......
  • Wilhoit v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • April 16, 1991
    ...ground (Henderson v. State, 94 Okl.Cr. , 230 P.2d 495, 23 A.L.R.2d 1292, cert. denied 72 S.Ct. 234, 342 U.S. 898, 96 L.Ed. 673; Vickers v. State, 538 P.2d 1134; Bowen v. State, 715 P.2d 3. The granting of a new trial based upon the ground of newly discovered evidence is within the sound dis......
  • Hill v. State, F-76-953
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • July 28, 1977
    ...many cases, newly discovered evidence has to be such that it could not reasonably have been discovered before a trial. Vickers v. State, Okl.Cr., 538 P.2d 1134 (1975). We find no merit to the defendant's last assignment of Since there are no reversible errors in this case, the judgment and ......

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