Christopher Stinson, Sr. v State Of Oklahoma
F-2011-70
Filed: Feb. 24, 2012
Not for publication
Prevailing Party: State of Oklahoma
Summary
Christopher Stinson, Sr. appealed his conviction for First Degree Felony Murder, First Degree Arson, and Manufacturing Controlled Dangerous Substance. The conviction and sentence were that he received life imprisonment for the murder charge and twelve years for the manufacturing charge, with the arson charge dismissed as it was part of the murder charge. The court agreed that there shouldn’t be two convictions for the same act (double jeopardy) and reversed the manufacturing charge. The court also affirmed the life sentence for the murder charge. No judges disagreed with the decision.
Decision
The Judgment and Sentence in Count I is AFFIRMED. The Judgment and Sentence in Count III is REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO DISMISS. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2012), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
Issues
- Was Appellant's conviction for Manufacturing Controlled Dangerous Substance improperly upheld as it violated the statutory prohibition against double punishment and the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy?
- Did the trial court commit reversible error by allowing the State to introduce prohibited character evidence that violated Appellant's constitutional rights?
- Was the sentence of life imprisonment excessive based on the facts of the case and should it be modified?
Findings
- Count III must be reversed and dismissed due to violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause.
- The other crimes evidence was properly admitted.
- Appellant's sentence of life imprisonment does not shock the conscience and no modification is warranted.
F-2011-70
Feb. 24, 2012
Christopher Stinson, Sr.
Appellantv
State Of Oklahoma
Appellee
v
State Of Oklahoma
Appellee
SUMMARY OPINION
LUMPKIN, JUDGE:
Appellant Christopher Stinson, Sr. was tried by jury and convicted of First Degree Felony Murder (Count I) (21 O.S.Supp.2006, § 701.7); First Degree Arson (Count II) (21 O.S. 2001, § 1401); and Manufacturing Controlled Dangerous Substance (Count III) (63 O.S.Supp.2005, § 2-401(G)), in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CF-2009-1876. The jury recommended as punishment life imprisonment in Count I, twelve (12) years imprisonment and a $10,000. fine in Count II and twelve (12) years imprisonment and a $50,000. fine in Count III. At sentencing, the trial court dismissed Count II, finding it the predicate felony for Count I. Appellant was sentenced in accordance with the jury’s verdict on both Counts I and III, ordering the sentences to be served consecutively. It is from this judgment and sentence that Appellant appeals.1
First Degree Felony Murder is an 85% crime pursuant to 21 O.S.Supp.2002, § 13.1.
1 Appellant raises the following propositions of error in support of his appeal:
I. Appellant’s conviction for Manufacturing must be dismissed as it is an underlying felony to the murder conviction and it violates Oklahoma’s statutory prohibition against double punishment found in 21 O.S.2001, § 11, as well as the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.
II. The trial court committed reversible error by allowing the State to introduce prohibited character evidence in violation of Appellant’s rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 2, §§ 7 and 9 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
III. A sentence of life imprisonment, under the facts of this case, is excessive and should be modified.
After thorough consideration of these propositions and the entire record before us on appeal including the original record, transcripts, and briefs of the parties, we have determined that under the law and the evidence Count III must be reversed. In Proposition I, we find Appellant’s conviction for Manufacturing Controlled Dangerous Substance (Count III) must be reversed and dismissed as convictions for both felony murder and the underlying felony violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.2
Under the unique circumstances of this case, both Count II and Count III served as predicate felonies for the first degree felony murder charged in Count I. Pursuant to 21 O.S.2001, § 1401, First Degree Arson can be committed in different ways. In Count II, Appellant was charged with committing First Degree Arson based upon the statutory option, while manufacturing or attempting to manufacture a controlled dangerous substance. As a result, the crime of manufacturing alleged in Count III became a part of the First Degree Arson charged in Count II, which was dismissed at sentencing.
In Proposition II, we find the other crimes evidence was properly admitted.
In Proposition III, Appellant’s sentence of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole does not shock the conscience of the Court. Therefore, no modification is warranted.
DECISION
The Judgment and Sentence in Count I is AFFIRMED. The Judgment and Sentence in Count III is REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO DISMISS. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2012), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.
AN APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY
THE HONORABLE WILLIAM C. KELLOUGH, DISTRICT JUDGE
APPEARANCES AT TRIAL
STEVE HJELM
P.O. BOX 33208
TULSA, OK
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
APPEARANCES ON APPEAL
MICHAEL D. MOREHEAD
INDIGENT DEFENDER SYSTEM
P.O. BOX 926
NORMAN OK 73070
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
TIM HARRIS
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
JACK THORP
E. SCOTT PRUITT
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA
TONY EVANS
TIMOTHY J. DOWNING
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
500 S. DENVER
TULSA, OK 74103
COUNSEL FOR THE STATE
OPINION BY: LUMPKIN, J.
A. JOHNSON, P.J.: CONCUR
LEWIS, V.P.J.: CONCUR
C. JOHNSON, J.: CONCUR
SMITH, J.: CONCUR
Footnotes:
- 21 O.S.Supp.2006, § 701.7
- 21 O.S. 2001, § 1401
- 63 O.S.Supp.2005, § 2-401(G)
- 21 O.S.Supp.2002, § 13.1
- 21 O.S.2001, § 11
- 21 O.S.2001, § 1401
- 20, 2 P.3d 344, 351
- 1993 OK CR 5, II 7, 853 P.2d 198, 200-201
- 1987 OK CR 182, IT 32, 745 P.2d 394, 405
- 1987 OK CR 178, I 22, 742 P.2d 1142, 1149
- 2007 OK CR 29, 11 75-77, 164 P.3d 208, 230
- 2001 OK CR 28, T 5, 34 P.3d 148
- 1994 OK CR 59, "I 33, 881 P.2d 92, 101
Oklahoma Statutes citations:
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.7 (2006) - First Degree Felony Murder
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1401 (2001) - First Degree Arson
- Okla. Stat. tit. 63 § 2-401(G) (2005) - Manufacturing Controlled Dangerous Substance
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 13.1 (2002) - Crimes Punishable by a Specific Percentage of Time Served
- Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 11 (2001) - Prohibition Against Double Punishment
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:
- Selsor v. State, 2000 OK CR 9, I 2, 20, 2 P.3d 344, 351
- Perry v. State, 1993 OK CR 5, II 7, 853 P.2d 198, 200-201
- Castro v. State, 1987 OK CR 182, IT 32, 745 P.2d 394, 405
- Johns v. State, 1987 OK CR 178, I 22, 742 P.2d 1142, 1149
- Eizember v. State, 2007 OK CR 29, II 75-77, 164 P.3d 208, 230
- Rea v. State, 2001 OK CR 28, T 5, 34 P.3d 148
- Bartell v. State, 1994 OK CR 59, I 33, 881 P.2d 92, 101