Stanley Norris Trammell v The State of Oklahoma
F-2004-1112
Filed: Dec. 16, 2005
Not for publication
Prevailing Party: Stanley Norris Trammell
Summary
Stanley Norris Trammell appealed his conviction for First Degree Murder and Shooting with Intent to Kill. His conviction and sentence were reversed, and he was granted a new trial. Judge C. Johnson dissented.
Decision
The Judgments and Sentences of the District Court are REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch18, App.2004, the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
Issues
- Was there an error in the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on self-defense, violating Mr. Trammell's rights to due process and a fair trial?
- Did the trial court err in prohibiting the defense from introducing character evidence regarding the decedent being the first aggressor, thereby depriving Mr. Trammell of a fundamentally fair trial and due process?
Findings
- the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense
- Proposition II is not addressed due to the relief recommended in Proposition I
- The Judgments and Sentences of the District Court are REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial
F-2004-1112
Dec. 16, 2005
Stanley Norris Trammell
Appellant
v
The State of Oklahoma
Appellee
SUMMARY OPINION
CHAPEL, PRESIDING JUDGE: Stanley Trammell was tried by jury in Bryan County District Court, Case No. CF-2003-245. He was convicted of Count I: First Degree Murder in violation of 21 O.S.2001, § 701.7; and Count II: Shooting with Intent to Kill in violation of 21 O.S.2001, § 652.1. The Honorable Farrell M. Hatch followed the jury’s recommendation and imposed the following consecutive sentences: life imprisonment with the possibility of parole on Count I and four (4) years’ imprisonment on Count II. Trammell appeals these judgments and sentences.
Trammell raises the following propositions of error:
I. The trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense, violating Mr. Trammell’s federal and state rights to due process of law and a fundamentally fair trial.
II. The trial court erred when it prohibited the defense from introducing character evidence tending to show that the decedent was the first aggressor, depriving Mr. Trammell a fundamentally fair trial and due process of law.
After thoroughly considering the entire record before us on appeal, including the original record, transcripts, briefs, and parties’ exhibits, we find in Proposition I that Trammell was entitled to self-defense instruction. Proposition II is not addressed due to the relief recommended in Proposition I.
Decision
The Judgments and Sentences of the District Court are REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch18, App.2004, the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
ATTORNEYS AT TRIAL
SILAS R. LYMAN, II
WAYNA TYNER
CAPITAL TRIAL DIVISION
207 WEST MAIN STREET
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA 73070
ATTORNEYS ON APPEAL
ROBERT W. JACKSON
STEVEN M. PRESSON
JACKSON & PRESSON P.C.
P.O. BOX 926
P.O. BOX 5392
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA 73070
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
MARK CAMPBELL
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
W.A. DREW EDMONDSON
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA
GREG JENKINS
JENNIFER B. MILLER
TIM WEBSTER
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
112 STATE CAPITOL
OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73105
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
OPINION BY: CHAPEL, P. J.
LUMPKIN, V.P.J.: CONCUR IN RESULTS
C. JOHNSON, J.: CONCUR
A. JOHNSON, J.: CONCUR
Trammell’s testimony supported the self-defense instructions. Trammell testified that he was attacked, then pursued by at least two if not three men, who had and were attempting to continue to assault him. This was sufficient to allow a jury to determine if Trammell was justified in using deadly force out of fear of great personal injury or death. 21 O.S.2001, § 733.
Footnotes:
- 1 Trammell was also acquitted of two counts of Feloniously Pointing a Firearm.
- 2 Broaddrick U. State, 706 P.2d 534, 536 (Okl.Cr. 1985)(defendant entitled to instructions on defense finding "possible" evidentiary support).
- 21 O.S.2001, § 733.
Oklahoma Statutes citations:
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.7 (2001) - First Degree Murder
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 652 (2001) - Shooting with Intent to Kill
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 733 (2001) - Justification for use of deadly force
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:
- Broaddrick v. State, 706 P.2d 534, 536 (Okl.Cr. 1985)