Blog

FILED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS STATE OF OKLAHOMA SEP 27 2012 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA MICHAEL S. RICHIE CLERK LORANCE RIDELL DEVER, ) ) Appellant, ) NOT FOR PUBLICATION ) V. ) No. RE 2011-0359 ) THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) Appellee. ) SUMMARY OPINION LUMPKIN, Judge: Appellant, Lorance Ridell Dever, pled guilty March 6, 2006, in the District Court of McCurtain County, Case No. CF-2006-76, to Assault and Battery with a Deadly Weapon. He was sentenced to eight years, all suspended except one year in the McCurtain County Jail, with rules and conditions of probation. The State filed a motion to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence on March 9, 2010, alleging Appellant committed the new crimes of Murder in the First Degree and Shooting With Intent to Kill. Following a hearing on April 25, 2011, the Honorable Willard Driesel, District Judge, found Appellant violated the rules and conditions of probation and revoked the balance of Appellant’s suspended sentence, seven years. Appellant appeals from the revocation of his suspended sentence. Appellant’s sole proposition of error is that the trial court lost jurisdiction to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence when a revocation hearing was not held within twenty days of arraignment. The State answers that Appellant acquiesced in the delay in the revocation hearing thereby waiving the 20-day Rule under Section 991b(A) of Title 22. Section 991b(A) requires a revocation hearing to be held within twenty days after the entry of the plea of not guilty to the petition unless waived by both the State and the defendant. In Grimes v. State, 2011 OK CR 16, I 7, 251 P.3d 749, we held that a defendant cannot acquiesce in the delay of a hearing or participate in the continuance of a hearing and then claim an entitlement to relief because the District Court did not abide by the 20-day time limitation. In the present case the revocation hearing was held a year after Appellant entered a plea of not guilty. The record is void of a waiver of the 20- day Rule. The record does not show Appellant was even advised of the 20-day Rule. While the revocation hearing was originally timely set, the hearing was rescheduled outside of the twenty days without explanation. The record does not show that Appellant or his counsel was present when the hearing was rescheduled or that Appellant requested any extension of time during this one year period. Based upon this record, we cannot find Appellant acquiesced in the delay of the revocation hearing. DECISION The revocation of Appellant’s suspended sentence in McCurtain County District Court Case No. CF-2006-76 is REVERSED AND REMANDED to the District Court with instructions to VACATE the order revoking Appellant’s suspended sentence. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of 2 Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2012), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision. REVOCATION APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MCCURTAIN COUNTY, THE HONORABLE WILLARD DRIESEL, DISTRICT JUDGE APPEARANCES AT TRIAL APPEARANCES ON APPEAL ELIZABETH GRIFFITH JAMES H. LOCKARD ATTORNEY AT LAW DEPUTY DIVISION CHIEF 113 N. CENTRAL AVE. OKLAHOMA INDIGENT DEFENSE IDABEL, OKLAHOMA 74745 SYSTEM COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT P.O. BOX 926 NORMAN, OKLAHOMA 73070 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT JOHNNY LOARD E. SCOTT PRUITT ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA MCCURTAIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE DONALD D. SELF P. O. BOX 1378 ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL IDABEL, OKLAHOMA 74745 313 N.W. 21 st STREET COUNSEL FOR THE STATE OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73105 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 RC 3

Click Here To Download PDF