Skip to content
OCCA Opinions
  • About
  • Files
  • OCCA Opinions
  • Concerted Action

    1. Home>
    2. Files>
    3. Concerted Action>

    S-2015-87

    • Post author:Staff
    • Post published:January 14, 2016
    • Post category:S

    In OCCA case No. S-2015-87, Donna Long and Lillian Shipman appealed their conviction for Financial Exploitation by Caretaker. In an unpublished decision, the court decided to affirm the lower court's dismissal of the case. One judge dissented. The State of Oklahoma charged Long and Shipman with financially exploiting Shipman's mother-in-law, who had passed away. The case revolved around two checks signed by the mother-in-law shortly before her death. The first check was for $5,500, and the second check was for $250,000, which the defendants deposited. During the preliminary hearing, the judge found that the evidence did not support the State's claims that the defendants were caretakers or that they exploited the deceased. The judge noted that while there were checks involved, there wasn't enough proof that Long and Shipman acted improperly or had bad intent in obtaining these checks. Both defendants filed motions to quash the information, claiming there was not enough evidence for the case to continue. Ultimately, the judge ruled in favor of the defendants, stating that the prosecution did not provide enough evidence to prove their guilt. The case was then appealed to a higher court, which reviewed the lower court's decision. The higher court concluded that the lower court did not make an error and affirmed the dismissal of the charges against Long and Shipman, agreeing that there was insufficient evidence presented during the preliminary hearing to justify proceeding with the case. In summary, the case focused on whether the defendants financially exploited their relative, but the court found the evidence lacking, leading to the dismissal of the charges.

    Continue ReadingS-2015-87

    Categories

    • C
    • CF
    • D
    • F
    • HC
    • J
    • JS
    • M
    • MA
    • O
    • PC
    • PR
    • RE
    • S
    • SR

    Tags

    Abuse of Discretion Affirmed Appeal Appellant Appellate Review Appellee Concurrent Sentences Consecutive Sentences Constitutional Rights Conviction Court of Criminal Appeals Criminal Appeals Cumulative Error Defense Counsel District Court Double Jeopardy Due Process Effective Assistance of Counsel Evidence Evidentiary Hearing Excessive sentence Fair Trial Guilty Plea Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Insufficient Evidence Judgment Judgment and Sentence Jurisdiction Life Imprisonment Mandate Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 11 Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 13.1 Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 701.8 Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 3.15 Oklahoma Oklahoma Constitution Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals Plain Error Plea agreement Propositions of Error Prosecutorial Misconduct Sentencing State of Oklahoma Suspended Sentence Trial Court

    Recent Posts

    • SR-2022-250
    • RE-2021-1290
    • F-2018-790
    • F-2021-1220
    • C-2021-504
    Copyright - WordPress Theme by OceanWP