James Lee Copeland, Jr. v The State Of Oklahoma

F-2009-236

Filed: Mar. 25, 2010

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

James Lee Copeland appealed his conviction for Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon. The court confirmed his conviction and sentence of fifteen years in prison, but it needed to fix some mistakes in the records. Judge Johnson agreed with the decision, but he also pointed out that the court's records incorrectly labeled his crime. Copeland's proper crime should be noted as Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon, not just Robbery with a Weapon. Judge Lumpkin and the other judges agreed with the ruling.

Decision

The Judgment and Sentence of the district court is AFFIRMED. The district court is directed to correct the Judgment and Sentence by order nunc pro tunc to reflect the proper conviction of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon and by striking the notation that "The defendant is to serve 85% of his sentence." Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2010), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Issues

• was the Judgment and Sentence in need of correction by an order nunc pro tunc?
• did the trial court accurately reflect the proper conviction in the Judgment and Sentence?
• should the notation regarding the 85% parole eligibility be struck from the Judgment and Sentence?

Findings

• The court affirmed the Judgment and Sentence.
• The district court is directed to correct the Judgment and Sentence by order nunc pro tunc to reflect the proper conviction of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon.
• The district court is also directed to correct the Judgment and Sentence by striking the notation that "The defendant is to serve 85% of his sentence."

F-2009-236

Mar. 25, 2010

James Lee Copeland, Jr.

Appellant

v

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

C. JOHNSON, PRESIDING JUDGE: Appellant, James Lee Copeland, was convicted after non-jury trial in Comanche County District Court, Case No. CF-2008-197, of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon. The trial court sentenced Appellant to fifteen years imprisonment with seven years suspended and a $1,000 fine. It is from this Judgment and Sentence that Appellant appeals to this Court.

Appellant raises the following proposition of error:
1. The Judgment and Sentence should be corrected by an order nunc pro tunc.

After thorough consideration of the proposition, and the entire record before us on appeal, including the original record, transcripts, and briefs of the parties, we affirm Mr. Copeland’s Judgment and Sentence. However, we agree that the record clearly indicates that Appellant was convicted of the crime of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon rather than the crime of Robbery with a Weapon as the Judgment and Sentence indicates. Accordingly, we direct the district court to correct the Judgment and Sentence by order nunc pro tunc to reflect the proper conviction of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon. See Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3, I 21, 177 P.3d 577, 581-82. We also find that because this crime is not one listed in 21 O.S.Supp.: 2002, § 13.1 as a crime subject to the 85% limit on parole eligibility, the district court is also directed to correct the Judgment and Sentence, by order nunc pro tunc, by striking the notation that The defendant is to serve 85% of his sentence. See Chavis Lenard Day U. State, F-2007-526 (November 19, 2008).

DECISION

The Judgment and Sentence of the district court is AFFIRMED. The district court is directed to correct the Judgment and Sentence by order nunc pro tunc to reflect the proper conviction of Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon and by striking the notation that The defendant is to serve 85% of his sentence. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2010), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3, ¶ 21, 177 P.3d 577, 581-82.
2. Chavis Lenard Day v. State, F-2007-526 (November 19, 2008).
3. 21 O.S.Supp. 2002, § 13.1.

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.8 (2011) - Attempted Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 13.1 (2011) - Crime Subject to 85% Limit on Parole Eligibility

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:

• Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3, I 21, 177 P.3d 577, 581-82
• Chavis Lenard Day v. State, F-2007-526 (November 19, 2008)