The State Of Oklahoma v Joel Christion Aranda

S 2011-0024

Filed: Oct. 17, 2011

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: Joel Christion Aranda

Summary

# Joel Christion Aranda appealed his conviction for multiple counts related to a violent incident involving a firearm. Conviction and sentence dismissed for Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Judge Smith dissented.

Decision

The order of the District Court of Cleveland County dismissing Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2011), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there sufficient evidence presented by the State to establish probable cause for Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6?
• Did the District Judge err in affirming the Magistrate's decision to sustain demurrers to Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6?
• Was the Magistrate's ruling an abuse of discretion in determining the sufficiency of the evidence for the alleged crimes?

Findings

• The district court's dismissal of Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 is affirmed.
• The state did not meet its burden of establishing probable cause for the dismissed counts.

S 2011-0024

Oct. 17, 2011

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellant

v

Joel Christion Aranda

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

LEWIS, V.P.J.: Appellee, Joel Christion Aranda, was charged in the District Court of Cleveland County, Case No. CF-2010-352, with Counts 1, 2 and 3 – Use of a Vehicle in Discharge of a Weapon in Concert with David Franco, Count 4 – Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon in Concert with David Franco, Count 5 – Feloniously Pointing a Firearm in Concert with David Franco, and Count 6 – Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon in Concert with David Franco. The preliminary hearing was held December 15, 2010. The Magistrate, the Honorable Steven L. Stice, sustained demurrers to Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6. The State appealed the ruling to the District Court. Following a hearing January 3, 2011, the Honorable George Butner, District Judge, affirmed Judge Stice’s ruling. From this adverse ruling, the State appeals to this Court pursuant to Section 1089.7 of Title 22. The appeal was automatically assigned to the Accelerated Docket of this Court. See Rule 11.2(A)(4), Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2011). Oral argument was held August 25, 2011, pursuant to Rule 11.2(F).

On appeal the State argued the District Judge erred by affirming the decision of the Magistrate. The purpose of the preliminary hearing is to establish probable cause that a crime was committed and probable cause that the defendant committed the crime. 22 O.S. Supp.2003, § 258(Eighth). The standard of review, set out in Section 1089.5 of Title 22, is whether the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to the State, is sufficient to find that a felony crime has been committed and that the defendant probably committed said crime. Absent an abuse of discretion in reaching that determination, the magistrate’s ruling will remain undisturbed. See State v. Weese, 1981 OK CR 19, 625 P.2d 118. In this case the State has not met its burden. As such, we will not interfere with the judgments of the lower courts.

DECISION

The order of the District Court of Cleveland County dismissing Counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch. 18, App. (2011), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

OPINION BY: LEWIS, V.P.J.
JOHNSON, A., P.J.: Concur
LUMPKIN, J.: Concur
JOHNSON, C., J.: Concur
SMITH, J.: Dissent

SMITH, J., DISSENTING: I would reverse the trial judge’s ruling on Counts 1 and 3 pursuant to this Court’s opinion in Burleson v. Saffle, 2002 OK CR 15, 46 P.3d 150. I would reverse the trial judge’s ruling regarding Counts 4, 5 and 6 and find that the State had presented sufficient evidence to bind Defendant, Aranda, over on those Counts for acting in concert with Defendant Franco.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. 22 O.S. Supp.2003, § 258(Eighth)
2. Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 1089.7
3. Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 1089.5
4. State v. Weese, 1981 OK CR 19, 625 P.2d 118
5. Burleson v. Saffle, 2002 OK CR 15, 46 P.3d 150

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 258 (Supp. 2003) - Preliminary hearing
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 1089.5 (2011) - Standard of review
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 1089.7 (2011) - Appeals
• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 - Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

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:

• State v. Weese, 1981 OK CR 19, 625 P.2d 118
• Burleson v. Saffle, 2002 OK CR 15, 46 P.3d 150