William Ray Pratt v The State of Oklahoma

F-2001-692

Filed: Oct. 15, 2002

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

William Ray Pratt appealed his conviction for First Degree Rape by Instrumentation and Child Sexual Abuse. His conviction and sentence were for forty-five years on each count, with the sentences to be served one after the other. The court found that while most of the allegations against him were upheld, one count of rape (Count VI) lacked sufficient proof of penetration and was reversed and sent back to be dismissed. Judges had differing opinions, with one judge dissenting.

Decision

The Judgments and Sentences of the trial court for Counts I-V and VII are AFFIRMED and Count VI is REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss.

Issues

• was there violation of Mr. Pratt's fundamental right to a fair trial due to the admission of other crime evidence?
• did prosecutorial misconduct and trial errors cumulatively deny Mr. Pratt due process?
• was the State's evidence sufficient to prove Count VI of rape by instrumentation?

Findings

• The court properly admitted the "other crimes" evidence at trial.
• Pratt was not denied a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct or any asserted trial errors.
• The evidence for Count VI was insufficient, leading to its reversal and remand with instructions to dismiss.
• The Judgments and Sentences of the trial court for Counts I-V and VII are AFFIRMED.

F-2001-692

Oct. 15, 2002

William Ray Pratt

Appellant

v

The State of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

CHAPEL, JUDGE: William Ray Pratt was tried by jury and convicted of Counts I-VI: First Degree Rape by Instrumentation in violation of 21 O.S.Supp.1998, §§ 1111, 1111.1 and 1114 and Count VII: Child Sexual Abuse in violation of 10 O.S.Supp. 1998, § 7115, After Former Conviction of a Felony, in Oklahoma County District Court Case No. CF-99-4266. In accordance with the jury’s recommendation, the Honorable Jerry D. Bass sentenced Pratt to forty-five (45) years on each count and ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. Pratt appeals from these convictions and sentences.

Pratt raises the following propositions of error:

I. Other crime evidence violated Mr. Pratt’s fundamental right to a fair trial under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, Article II, §§ 7 and 20 of the Oklahoma Constitution, and Okla. Stat. Tit. 12, §§ 2403, 2404(B) (1991).

II. Prosecutorial misconduct and trial errors, cumulatively, denied Mr. Pratt due process and require reversal or a sentence modification.

III. The State presented insufficient evidence to prove one of the four counts of rape by instrumentation alleged in Counts 3-6 to have been committed against T.M. and thus Count 6 must be reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss.

After thorough consideration of the entire record before us on appeal, including the original record, transcripts, briefs, and exhibits of the parties, we find that Count VI must be reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss because the State failed to prove the required element of penetration. We find in Proposition I that the other crimes evidence was properly admitted at trial. We find in Proposition II that Pratt was not denied a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct or any asserted trial errors. We find in Proposition III that the evidence for Count VI was insufficient.

Decision:

The Judgments and Sentences of the trial court for Counts I-V and VII are AFFIRMED and Count VI is REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. Okla. Stat. tit. 12, §§ 2403, 2404(B) (1991).
2. Selsor v. State, 2 P.3d 344, 355 (Okl.Cr.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1039, 121 S.Ct. 2002, 149 L.Ed.2d 1004 (2001).
3. Myers v. State, 17 P.3d 1021, 1029-30 (Okl.Cr.2000), cert. denied, - U.S. 121 S.Ct. 228, 151 L.Ed.2d 163 (2001).
4. Spuehler v. State, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04 (Okl.Cr.1985).

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1111 (1998) - First Degree Rape by Instrumentation
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1111.1 (1998) - First Degree Rape by Instrumentation
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1114 (1998) - First Degree Rape by Instrumentation
• Okla. Stat. tit. 10 § 7115 (1998) - Child Sexual Abuse
• Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 2403 (1991) - Evidence; General Provisions
• Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 2404(B) (1991) - Evidence; Character Evidence

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:

• Myers v. State, 17 P.3d 1021, 1029-30 (Okl.Cr.2000), cert. denied, - U.S. 121 S.Ct. 228, 151 L.Ed.2d 163 (2001)
• Selsor v. State, 2 P.3d 344, 355 (Okl.Cr.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1039, 121 S.Ct. 2002, 149 L.Ed.2d 1004 (2001)
• Spuehler v. State, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04 (Okl.Cr.1985)