Shazel Steel v State Of Oklahoma

RE-2018-611

Filed: Aug. 15, 2019

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: State Of Oklahoma

Summary

Shazel Steel appealed his conviction for violating probation. Conviction and sentence were affirmed, meaning his probation was revoked and he had to serve the rest of his sentences in jail. Judge Lewis and other judges agreed with the decision, but Judge Kuehn dissented.

Decision

The order granting the State's Applications to Revoke Suspended Sentence in Tulsa County District Court Case Nos. CF-2015-1948, CF-2015-2091, and CF-2015-2152 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 delivery and filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there sufficient evidence to establish that Mr. Steel had knowingly and willfully possessed a firearm?
• Did the District Court abuse its discretion in revoking Mr. Steel's entire sentence?

Findings

• The court did not err in finding that the evidence was sufficient to establish that Mr. Steel had knowingly and willfully possessed a firearm.
• The district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Mr. Steel's entire sentence.

RE-2018-611

Aug. 15, 2019

Shazel Steel

Appellant

v

State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

LUMPKIN, JUDGE:

On June 6, 2015, Appellant, Shazel Steel, pled guilty in three Tulsa County District Court Cases. CF-2015-1948: Robbery in the First Degree. He was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment and fined $500.00. CF-2015-2091: Count 1 – Robbery with a Firearm and Count 2 – Burglary in the First Degree. He was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment and fined $100.00 for each count.¹ CF-2015-2152: Count 1 – Robbery with a Firearm, Count 2 – Kidnapping, and Count 3 – Assault with a Dangerous Weapon. He was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment for Counts 1 & 2 and ten years imprisonment for Count 3. He was also fined $100.00 on each count.²

¹ Count 3 – Possession of Firearm After Juvenile Adjudication, was dismissed.
² Count 4 – Possession of Firearm After Juvenile Adjudication, was dismissed.

The sentences from all three cases were ordered to run concurrently. A two year judicial review was set. The Judicial Review Proceedings took place on June 5, 2017. Appellant’s sentences were modified to have the balance suspended in full in each case. The State filed applications to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentences in all three cases. The applications alleged Appellant failed to comply with the Rules and Conditions of Probation by being charged with Possession of a Firearm AFCF and Transporting Loaded Firearm in Motor Vehicle, as alleged in Tulsa County District Court Case No. CF-2017-4536. In Case Nos. CF-2015-2091 and CF-2015-2152, the State also alleged that Appellant failed to report as directed, admitted to smoking marijuana, failed to notify change of address, failed to complete anger management treatment, failed to complete substance abuse treatment, and failed to pay probation fees.

Following a hearing on the State’s Applications, the Honorable James M. Caputo, District Judge, ordered Appellant’s suspended sentences be revoked in full. Appellant appeals the revocation of his suspended sentences and raises the following propositions of error:

I. The evidence at the revocation hearing was insufficient to establish that Mr. Steel had knowingly and willfully possessed a firearm; and
II. The District Court abused its discretion in revoking Mr. Steel’s entire sentence.

We affirm the order of the District Court revoking Appellant’s suspended sentences in full.

I. The decision to revoke a suspended sentence in whole or in part is within the sound discretion of the trial court and such decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse thereof. Tilden v. State, 2013 OK CR 10, ¶ 10, 306 P.3d 554, 557. “An ‘abuse of discretion’ has been defined by this Court as a ‘clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, one that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented in support of and against the application.” Walker v. State, 1989 OK CR 65, ¶ 5, 780 P.2d 1181, 1183. Officer Michael Anthony Terwilliger testified that a loaded firearm was found in a car that Appellant was driving without a license. Rule #7 of the Rules and Conditions of Probation prohibited Appellant from being “in a vehicle where firearms are located.” Appellant has not shown an abuse of discretion.

II. “The decision of the trial court to revoke a suspended sentence in whole or in part is within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent an abuse thereof.” Jones v. State, 1988 OK CR 20, ¶ 8, 749 P.2d 563, 565. Appellant has not shown an abuse of discretion.

DECISION

The order granting the State’s Applications to Revoke Suspended Sentence in Tulsa County District Court Case Nos. CF-2015-1948, CF-2015-2091, and CF-2015-2152 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 delivery and filing of this decision.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. ¹ Count 3 - Possession of Firearm After Juvenile Adjudication, was dismissed.
2. ² Count 4 - Possession of Firearm After Juvenile Adjudication, was dismissed.
3. 3 Tilden v. State, 2013 OK CR 10, ¶ 10, 306 P.3d 554, 557.
4. 4 Jones v. State, 1988 OK CR 20, ¶ 8, 749 P.2d 563, 565.
5. 5 Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2019).

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

No Oklahoma statutes found.

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:

• Tilden v. State, 2013 OK CR 10, I 10, 306 P.3d 554, 557.
• Walker v. State, 1989 OK CR 65, I 5, 780 P.2d 1181, 1183.
• Jones v. State, 1988 OK CR 20, I 8, 749 P.2d 563, 565.