Monte Dean Perry v The State Of Oklahoma

F-2018-760

Filed: Dec. 5, 2019

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

Monte Dean Perry appealed his conviction for assault and battery with a deadly weapon and endeavoring to perform an act of violence. Conviction and sentence were 30 years for the assault and 5 years for the other charge, to be served at the same time. No judges dissented.

Decision

The Judgment and Sentence is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.1 18, App. (2019), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision. Appellant must serve 85% of his sentence in Count 1 before he is eligible for consideration for parole. 21 O.S.Supp.2015, § 13.1 (5).

Issues

• was the evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Perry assaulted Mr. Tuttle with a knife?

Findings

• The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for assault and battery with a deadly weapon.
• The Judgment and Sentence is affirmed.

F-2018-760

Dec. 5, 2019

Monte Dean Perry

Appellant

v

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

LEWIS, PRESIDING JUDGE: Appellant, Monte Dean Perry, was tried by jury and found guilty of Count 1, assault and battery with a deadly weapon, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 652(C); and Count 2, endeavoring to perform an act of violence, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 1378(A), in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. CF-2016-3706. The jury sentenced Appellant to thirty (30) years imprisonment in Count 1 and five (5) years imprisonment in Count 2. The Honorable Cindy H. Truong, District Judge, pronounced judgment and ordered the sentences served concurrently.

Mr. Perry appeals in the following proposition of error: The State’s evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Perry assaulted Mr. Tuttle with a knife. Appellant argues in Proposition One that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his conviction for assault and battery with a deadly weapon. We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Spuehler v. State, 1985 OK CR 132, I 7, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04. The evidence here is sufficient. Proposition One is denied.

DECISION

The Judgment and Sentence is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.1 18, App. (2019), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the delivery and filing of this decision.

1 Appellant must serve 85% of his sentence in Count 1 before he is eligible for consideration for parole. 21 O.S.Supp.2015, § 13.1 (5).

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY
HONORABLE CINDY H. TRUONG, DISTRICT JUDGE

APPEARANCES AT TRIAL

MICHAEL NOLAND
435 N. WALKER, # 105
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73102
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

APPEARANCES ON APPEAL

NANCY WALKER-JOHNSON
P.O. BOX 926
NORMAN, OK 73070-0926
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

REBECCA HILL
MIKE HUNTER
RACHAEL SMITH
ATTORNEY GENERAL
ASST. DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

THEODORE M. PEEPER
320 ROBERT S. KERR, # 505
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73102
ATTORNEYS FOR STATE

313 N.E. 21st ST.
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

OPINION BY LEWIS, P.J.
KUEHN, V.P.J.: Concur
LUMPKIN, J.: Concur
HUDSON, J: Concur
ROWLAND, J.: Concur

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. 21 O.S.2011, § 652(C)
2. 21 O.S.2011, § 1378(A)
3. Spuehler v. State, 1985 OK CR 132, I 7, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04
4. 21 O.S.Supp.2015, § 13.1 (5)
5. Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.1 18, App. (2019)

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 652(C) - Assault and battery with a deadly weapon
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1378(A) - Endeavoring to perform an act of violence
• Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 13.1 - 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:

• Spuehler v. State, 1985 OK CR 132, I 7, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04