Blog

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA CESAR JURADO, Appellant, NOT FOR PUBLICATION V. No. F 2018-0812 THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, FILED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Appellee. STATE OF OKLAHOMA SEP 19 2019 SUMMARY OPINION JOHN D. HADDEN HUDSON, JUDGE: CLERK Appellant, Cesar Jurado, entered pleas of guilty in the District Court of Oklahoma County on December 2, 2015, in the following cases: CF-2014-8607: Count 1 – Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance With Intent to Distribute, a felony; Count 2 – Driving While Privilege Suspended, a misdemeanor; and Count 3 – Failure to Carry Valid Security Verification, a misdemeanor. CF-2015-5536: Count 1 – Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance With Intent to Distribute, a felony; and Count 3 – Possession of an Offensive Weapon While Committing a Felony, a felony. CF-2015-6471: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance With Intent to Distribute, a felony. 1 Count 2 – Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance, and Count 4 – Possession of an Offensive Weapon While Committing a Felony, were dismissed. Sentencing was delayed until September 11, 2016, while Appellant was committed to the Delayed Sentencing Program for Youthful Offenders. After successfully completing the Delayed Sentencing Program, Appellant’s sentences were deferred until June 14, 2026. The State filed an application to accelerate Appellant’s deferred sentences on January 18, 2018. The State alleged Appellant committed the new crimes of Murder in the First Degree and Assault with a Deadly Weapon as alleged in Oklahoma County District Court Case No. CF-2017-0659. Following a hearing on July 26, 2018, before the Honorable Bill Graves, District Judge, the State’s motion was granted. Appellant was sentenced in Case No. CF-2014-8607 to life imprisonment on Count 1, one year on Count 2 and thirty days on Count 3. In Case No. CF-2015-5536 Appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment on Count 1 and ten years on Count 3. Appellant was also given life imprisonment in Case No. CF-2015-6471. The sentences in these three cases were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant appeals from the acceleration of his deferred sentences. On appeal Appellant raised the sole proposition of error that it was an abuse of discretion to accelerate Appellant’s deferred 2 sentence based on the incompetent, uncorroborated testimony of an unreliable eye witness who did not testify in person such that the court could not make a credibility determination. We affirm the trial court’s order to accelerate Appellant’s deferred sentences. The District Court did not err in allowing the State to introduce into evidence at the acceleration hearing the transcript of Appellant’s preliminary hearing in Oklahoma County District Court Case No. CF- 2017-659. See Wortham v. State, 2008 OK CR 18, IT 15, 188 P.3d 201. Counsel for Appellant at the acceleration hearing represented Appellant at the preliminary hearing. The appeal record shows that counsel for Appellant confronted and cross-examined the witnesses during the preliminary hearing. At an acceleration hearing, the court only makes a factual determination involving the existence of a violation of the terms of the deferred sentence. The consequence of the judicial determination that any conditions of the deferred judgment have been violated is to enter judgment and impose sentence. Violations of conditions of a deferred sentence need only be shown by a preponderance of the evidence. The decision to accelerate a deferred sentence lies within the discretion of the trial court. Hagar U. State, 1999 OK CR 35, I 10, 3 990 P.2d 894. An abuse of discretion is any unreasonable or arbitrary action taken without proper consideration of the facts and law pertaining to the matter at issue. An abuse of discretion has also been described as “a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, one that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented.” State v. Delso, 2013 OK CR 5, IT 5, 298 P.3d 1192. In this case, Appellant has not shown an abuse of discretion. DECISION The acceleration of Appellant’s deferred sentences in Oklahoma County District Court Case Nos. CF-2014-8607, CF-2015-5536, and CF-2015-6471 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2019), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision. AN APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY, THE HONORABLE BILL GRAVES, DISTRICT JUDGE 4 APPEARANCES AT APPEARANCES ON ACCELERATION HEARING APPEAL KENDA MCINTOSH ANDREA DIGILIO MILLER ASSISTANT PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSISTANT PUBLIC DEFENDER OKLAHOMA COUNTY PUBLIC OKLAHOMA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE DEFENDER’S OFFICE 611 COUNTY OFFICE BLDG. 611 COUNTY OFFICE BLDG. 320 ROBERT S. KERR AVE. 320 ROBERT S. KERR AVE. OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73102 73102 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT DANIEL GRIDLEY MIKE HUNTER ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ATTORNEY OKLAHOMA DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE CAROLINE E.J. HUNT 320 ROBERT S. KERR, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY SUITE 505 GENERAL OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 313 N.E. 21st STREET 73102 OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA COUNSEL FOR THE STATE 73105 COUNSEL FOR THE STATE OPINION BY: HUDSON, J. LEWIS, P.J.: CONCUR KUEHN, V.P.J.: CONCUR LUMPKIN, J.: CONCUR ROWLAND, J.: RECUSE

Click Here To Download PDF