Aaron Perry Hampton v The State Of Oklahoma

C-2007-554

Filed: Feb. 13, 2008

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

Aaron Perry Hampton appealed his conviction for burglary in the first degree and assault with a dangerous weapon. Conviction and sentence were upheld with 35 years in prison for the first two counts, along with fines and jail time for the other counts. Judge Kellough denied Hampton's request to withdraw his guilty pleas. There was some disagreement about his sentences, but the court found them appropriate. They also instructed the lower court to correct some clerical errors in the judgment. Judge Lumpkin, Judge C. Johnson, Judge Chapel, and Judge A. Johnson all agreed with the opinion, but Judge Lewis wrote the summary.

Decision

The Petition for the Writ of Certiorari is DENIED. The Judgment and Sentence of the District Court of Tulsa County is REMANDED for correction of the clerical errors noted herein but otherwise AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2007), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there an abuse of discretion by the trial court in denying the motion to withdraw the pleas based on the claim that the pleas were not made knowingly and voluntarily?
• Did the court find the sentences imposed for Counts 1 and 2 to be excessive and in need of modification?
• Should the case be remanded for correction of clerical errors in the judgment and sentence documents?

Findings

• The court did not err in overruling Mr. Hampton's motion to withdraw his pleas, as Petitioner entered his pleas knowingly and voluntarily.
• The court did not find the sentences in Count 1 and Count 2 to be excessive and declined to modify them.
• The court remanded the case to the District Court of Tulsa County for correction of the clerical errors in the Judgment and Sentences.

C-2007-554

Feb. 13, 2008

Aaron Perry Hampton

Appellant

v

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

LEWIS, JUDGE: Aaron Perry Hampton, Petitioner, entered blind pleas of guilty to Count 1, burglary in the first degree, in violation of 21 O.S.2001; § 1431; and nolo contendere to Count 2, assault with a dangerous weapon, in violation of 21 O.S.2001, § 645. Petitioner also pled nolo contendere to Count 4, assault and battery, in violation of 21 O.S.Supp.2006, § 644; and Count 5, obstructing an officer in violation of 21 O.S.2001, § 540, in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CF-2006-5407. The State alleged Petitioner committed Counts 1 and 2 after prior conviction of two (2) or more felonies. The Honorable William C. Kellough, District Judge, convicted Petitioner upon his pleas and ordered a pre-sentence investigation. Judge Kellough later sentenced Petitioner to concurrent terms of thirty five (35) years imprisonment and a $2000.00 fine in each of Counts 1 and 2; ninety (90) days in jail and a $500.00 fine in Count 4; and one (1) year in jail and a $1000.00 fine in Count 5. Petitioner moved to withdraw the pleas. After evidentiary hearing, the District Court denied the application. Petitioner seeks the writ of certiorari to vacate the judgment of the District Court, 22 O.S.2001, § 1051(a), alleging three propositions of error:

1. The Trial Court Abused Its Discretion By Overruling Mr. Hampton’s Motion To Withdraw His Pleas Because Petitioner Did Not Knowingly And Voluntarily Enter His Pleas.
2. Petitioner’s Sentences In Count 1 And Count 2 That Total Thirty Five Years Are Excessive, Should Shock The Conscience Of This Court And Should Be Favorably Modified.
3. This Court Should Remand Mr. Hampton’s Case To The District Court Of Tulsa County With Instructions To Correct The Judgment And Sentence Documents By An Order Nunc Pro Tunc.

In Proposition One, we find the circumstances show that Petitioner was mentally competent to enter his plea and did so knowingly and voluntarily. Ocampo v. State, 1989 OK CR 38, 9 7, 778 P.2d 920, 923. Petitioner has not shown that his guilty plea was a result of ignorance, inadvertence, or improper influence. Dangerfield v. State, 1987 OK CR 185, I 9, 742 P.2d 573, 575.

Proposition Two alleges an excessive sentence. The sentence imposed on a defendant’s plea of guilty or nolo contendere is within the District Court’s discretion. The sentences here are within the statutory range authorized by law and are appropriate to the seriousness of the offense. Rea v. State, 2001 OK CR 28, 34 P.3d 148. We decline to modify them. Proposition Two is denied.

In Proposition Three, Petitioner points out that due to clerical errors, the Judgment and Sentence documents do not properly reflect the District Court’s order that all sentences are to be served concurrently as pronounced by the District Court at sentencing. He also points out that Judgment and Sentence documents recite the wrong case number for a prior conviction as CF-91-566, rather than the correct case number, CF-1991-3566. While the latter error threatens no conceivable prejudice to Petitioner, we REMAND this matter to the District Court of Tulsa County with instructions to enter corrected Judgments and Sentences, and otherwise AFFIRM.

DECISION

The Petition for the Writ of Certiorari is DENIED. The Judgment and Sentence of the District Court of Tulsa County is REMANDED for correction of the clerical errors noted herein but otherwise AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2007), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. Ocampo v. State, 1989 OK CR 38, 9 7, 778 P.2d 920, 923.
2. Dangerfield v. State, 1987 OK CR 185, I 9, 742 P.2d 573, 575.
3. Rea v. State, 2001 OK CR 28, 34 P.3d 148.
4. 22 O.S.2001, § 1051(a).
5. Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1431.
6. Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 645.
7. Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 644.
8. Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 540.

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1431 (2001) - Burglary in the first degree
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 645 (2001) - Assault with a dangerous weapon
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 644 (Supp. 2006) - Assault and battery
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 540 (2001) - Obstructing an officer
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 1051 (2001) - Withdrawal of plea

Oklahoma Administrative Rules citations:

No Oklahoma administrative rules found.

U.S. Code citations:

No US Code citations found.

Other citations:

No other rule citations found.

Case citations:

• Ocampo v. State, 1989 OK CR 38, 7, 778 P.2d 920, 923
• Dangerfield v. State, 1987 OK CR 185, 9, 742 P.2d 573, 575
• Rea v. State, 2001 OK CR 28, 34 P.3d 148