Steven Randel Hargrove v The State Of Oklahoma

F-2004-666

Filed: Jun. 8, 2005

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

Steven Randel Hargrove appealed his conviction for Failure to Register as a Sex Offender. Conviction and sentence were modified to two years imprisonment. Judge Chapel dissented, stating that the evidence was not enough to prove that Hargrove intentionally failed to register.

Decision

The Judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Sentence is MODIFIED to two years imprisonment. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2005), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there sufficient evidence to convict Appellant of Failure to Register as a Sex Offender?
• Did Appellant receive ineffective assistance of counsel?
• Was Appellant's sentence excessive?
• Did the accumulation of errors deprive Appellant of a fair trial?

Findings

• the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction
• Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel
• the sentence was modified to two years imprisonment
• the remaining claims were rendered moot

F-2004-666

Jun. 8, 2005

Steven Randel Hargrove

Appellant

v

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

Appellant, Steven Randel Hargrove, was convicted by a jury in Comanche County District Court, Case No. CF-2003-399, of Failure to Register as a Sex Offender (57 O.S.2001, § 587). On June 3, 2004, the Honorable C. Allen McCall, District Judge, sentenced Appellant to five years imprisonment, in accordance with the jury’s recommendation. Appellant then timely lodged this appeal.

Appellant raises the following propositions of error:
1. The evidence was insufficient to convict Appellant, in violation of the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 2, §§ 7 and 20 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
2. Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 2, § 20 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
3. Appellant received an excessive sentence in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 2, § 9 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
4. The accumulation of errors deprived Appellant of a fair trial, in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 2, § 7 of the Oklahoma Constitution.

After thorough consideration of the propositions, and the entire record before us on appeal, including the original record, transcripts, and briefs of the parties, we find AFFIRM Appellant’s conviction, but MODIFY the sentence imposed.

As to Proposition 1, whether or not Appellant’s failure to register as a sex offender was willful was seriously called into question at trial. While a rational juror might have concluded that Appellant’s failure to register was not willful, the evidence, taken as a whole and in a light most favorable to the State, could also support the opposite conclusion. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Wyatt v. State, 1988 OK CR 58, ¶ 10, 752 P.2d 1131, 1133-34. We decline to substitute our judgment for the jury’s under these circumstances. Proposition 1 is denied.

However, we agree that the details of Appellant’s prior sex offenses (including the fact that the sentences were largely suspended) had no proper place in the trial, that defense counsel’s failure to seek exclusion of this information from the jury constituted deficient performance, and that the jury’s recommendation of the maximum sentence for the offense might well have been influenced by this information. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Stringfellow v. State, 1987 OK CR 233, ¶ 5, 744 P.2d 1277, 1279-80; Baker v. State, 1967 OK CR 178, ¶ 9, 432 P.2d 935, 938. We therefore MODIFY Appellant’s sentence to two years imprisonment. Bean v. State, 1964 OK CR 59, ¶¶ 7-12, 392 P.2d 753, 755-56. Our disposition of Proposition 2 renders the remaining claims moot.

DECISION

The Judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Sentence is MODIFIED to two years imprisonment. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2005), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Footnotes:

1. 57 O.S.2001, § 587.
2. Jackson V. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Wyatt U. State, 1988 OK CR 58, I 10, 752 P.2d 1131, 1133-34.
3. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Stringfellow V. State, 1987 OK CR 233, II 5, 744 P.2d 1277, 1279-80); Baker U. State, 1967 OK CR 178, 1 9, 432 P.2d 935, 938.
4. Bean V. State, 1964 OK CR 59, 11 7-12, 392 P.2d 753, 755-56.

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 57 § 587 (2001) - Failure to Register as a Sex Offender
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.8 (2011) - Sentencing for Sex Offenders

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:

• Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
• Wyatt v. State, 1988 OK CR 58, ¶ 10, 752 P.2d 1131, 1133-34
• Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)
• Stringfellow v. State, 1987 OK CR 233, ¶ 5, 744 P.2d 1277, 1279-80
• Baker v. State, 1967 OK CR 178, ¶ 9, 432 P.2d 935, 938
• Bean v. State, 1964 OK CR 59, ¶ 7-12, 392 P.2d 753, 755-56

Click Here To Download PDF