Woods v. State, F-77-500
| Decision Date | 20 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. F-77-500,F-77-500 |
| Citation | 569 P.2d 1004 |
| Parties | Dale Avon WOODS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
An appeal from the District Court, Oklahoma County; Joe Cannon, judge.
Michael T. Braswell, Porter & Braswell, Oklahoma City, for appellant.
Larry Derryberry, Atty. Gen., Bill J. Bruce, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant, Dale Avon Woods, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged in the District Court, Oklahoma County, Case No. CRF-76-3864, with the offense of Robbery in the First Degree, in violation of 21 O.S.1971, §§ 791 and 797. The case was tried to a jury, and a guilty verdict was returned. Punishment was assessed at five (5) years' imprisonment. From judgment and sentence defendant has perfected an appeal to this Court.
Elizabeth Harris was first to testify, stating that she lived in Ardmore, Oklahoma, and was visiting her son David in Oklahoma City on October 15, 1976. She stated that David lived in the 400 block of N.W. 25th Street. Around 10:30 p. m. on that date after doing some shopping, she and a companion, Bernice Neff, returned to her son's apartment. As she parked the car, she observed a young black male, whom she identified as the defendant, step out of an apartment located two doors down from her son's. The two women waited in the car until the man walked by and then got out and walked towards her son's apartment. The witness stated that she stooped to pick up her dog and heard at that time a loud flapping noise. As she turned she observed Mrs. Neff start to fall. The witness prevented the fall by grabbing Mrs. Neff's dress. The witness then noticed that her own purse was missing. She screamed quite loudly, Defendant stopped running for an instant when he heard her scream and turned and faced the witness. Mrs. Harris stated that defendant stopped in front of the apartment from which she had originally seen him leave. He carried her purse in his left hand. The witness began chasing him, but he ran down an alley and she could not catch him. The witness then went back to Mrs. Neff, who had lost consciousness. Her son came out of his apartment and eventually called the police. The witness stated that the lighting conditions around the apartment were good, and that she had clearly observed the defendant. Further, she stated that on occasions past, while visiting her son, she had seen the defendant in the neighborhood. The witness also stated that she had $800.00 in her purse, that neither the money nor the purse had ever been recovered, and that she did not give defendant permission to take it. Lastly, she testified that she had occasion to identify defendant in a lineup.
Tommy Lee Johnson, police officer with the Oklahoma City Police Department, testified as to his investigation. He received a description and noted that Mrs. Neff had a large gash in her head. Several days later, he arrested defendant at his apartment, which was only several doors away from where the purse snatching had occurred. The officer stated that when he first confronted defendant, defendant gave him a false name. Subsequently, he searched defendant's apartment, but nothing incriminating was revealed. Following this witness' testimony the State rested.
The defendant and four witnesses testified that at the time of the robbery he and they were playing dominos. The defendant denied committing the crime and stated that he had had no prior trouble with the law. Defendant also presented his mother and his employer as character witnesses.
Defendant's first assignment of error is that the evidence is insufficient in that an essential element of the crime was not proved. Title 21 O.S.1971, § 791, defines robbery as follows:
"Robbery is a wrongful taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear."
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Adoption of the 2003 Revisions to the Ouji
...for robbery requires that only one be proved. It is not necessary that both force and fear be used against the victim. Woods v. State, 569 P.2d 1004 (Okl. Cr. 1977); Hazlewood, supra; In re Application of Massie, 283 P.2d 573 (Okl. Cr. The eighth element lists the alternate force and fear f......
-
Eddings v. State
...Eddings v. State, 455 U.S. 104, 117, 102 S.Ct. 869, 71 L.Ed.2d 1 (1982). As this Court does not weigh evidence, see, e.g., Woods v. State, 569 P.2d 1004 (Okl.Cr.1977); Tharps v. State, 555 P.2d 1054 (Okl.Cr.1976), we remanded the case to the Creek County District Court for further proceedin......
-
Campbell v. State, F-80-455
...is evidence that tends to prove the lesser included offense was committed. Rogers v. State, 583 P.2d 1104 (Okl.Cr.1978); Woods v. State, 569 P.2d 1004 (Okl.Cr.1977). In the case at bar, the appellant's defense, which was alibi, did not suggest any lesser included offenses. Therefore, this a......
-
Jetton v. State, s. F-80-224
...with force or innocent. Hankins v. State, 602 P.2d 1052 (Okl.Cr. 1979); Rogers v. State, 583 P.2d 1104 (Okl.Cr. 1978); Woods v. State, 569 P.2d 1004 (Okl.Cr. 1977). This assignment of error is thus without In their second assignment of error, the defendants allege that there was insufficien......