burden defense in Oklahoma

13 Oklahoma opinions name it 3 courts 1933–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Oklahoma courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

Case	Followed	Cited
Roney v. Stategreen oklacrimapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 2 sentences 2020Vanderpool , 2018 OK CR 39, ¶ 46, 434 P.3d at 328; see also , e.g ., Roney v. State , 1991 OK CR 114, § 10, 819 P.2d 286, 288 (defendant has the burden to challenge evidence of prior convictions). 2020Vanderpool , 2018 OK CR 39, ¶ 46, 434 P.3d at 328; see also , e.g ., Roney v. State , 1991 OK CR 114, § 10, 819 P.2d 286, 288 (defendant has the burden to challenge evidence of prior convictions).	1	1
VANDERPOOL v. STATEgreen oklacrimapp · 2018 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 2 sentences 2020Vanderpool , 2018 OK CR 39, ¶ 46, 434 P.3d at 328; see also , e.g ., Roney v. State , 1991 OK CR 114, § 10, 819 P.2d 286, 288 (defendant has the burden to challenge evidence of prior convictions). 2020Vanderpool , 2018 OK CR 39, ¶ 46, 434 P.3d at 328; see also , e.g ., Roney v. State , 1991 OK CR 114, § 10, 819 P.2d 286, 288 (defendant has the burden to challenge evidence of prior convictions).	1	1
Grayson v. Stithgreen okla · 1938 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993 2 sentences 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917). 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917).	1	1
City of Tulsa v. Stroudgreen okla · 1938 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993 2 sentences 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917). 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917).	1	1
Morris v. Stategreen oklacrimapp · 1988 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990 1 sentence 1990See Brewer, 718 P.2d at 361 ; Morris v. State, 766 P.2d 1388, 1390 (Okl.Cr.1988).	1	1
Brewer v. Stategreen oklacrimapp · 1986 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1990–1990 1 sentence 1990See Brewer, 718 P.2d at 361 ; Morris v. State, 766 P.2d 1388, 1390 (Okl.Cr.1988).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (17)

Case	Cited	Years
Grissom v. State green oklacrimapp · 2011 2 sentences 2016In declining the instruction, which counsel assumed Appellant would be entitled to because of the evidence of his intoxication, trial counsel explained their concern that under the voluntary intoxication instruction: [I]f it hasn't been proven to them by the defendant that he was incapable of forming, in this case, malice aforethought, then malice aforethought exists. 179 Counsel acknowledged that the instruction placed no burden on them to prove intoxication, but further stated that: In a cage where we have what we believe is significant evidence of a lack of malice outside of the intoxicatio 2016There, the Court held that: . [where the defendant makes admissions by counsel during trial that render every defense unavailable save one, he is deemed to have elected that defense; and may, by his election, foreclose the submission of instructions on other theories of defense or lesser-included offenses inconsistent with his defense. 2011 OK CR 3 , 1 35, 258 P.3d at 982 .	2	2016–2016
PROGRESSIVE PRODUCTS, INC. v. Swartz green kan · 2011 1 sentence 2016There, the Court held that: . [where the defendant makes admissions by counsel during trial that render every defense unavailable save one, he is deemed to have elected that defense; and may, by his election, foreclose the submission of instructions on other theories of defense or lesser-included offenses inconsistent with his defense. 2011 OK CR 3 , 1 35, 258 P.3d at 982 .	1	2016–2016
State Ex Rel. Campbell v. $18,235.00 green okla · 2008 1 sentence 2012Id. 1 36 The Court then distinguished the provisions of Section 2-503(A)(7) from the balance of the forfeiture provisions of Section 2-503(A)(2)-(6) and (8)-(9).	1	2012–2012
State, Ex Rel. Lane v. Bass green oklacrimapp · 2004 2 sentences 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials. 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials.	1	2006–2006
Myers v. State green oklacrimapp · 2005 2 sentences 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials. 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials.	1	2006–2006
Blonner v. State green oklacrimapp · 2006 2 sentences 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials. 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials.	1	2006–2006
Lambert v. State green oklacrimapp · 2003 2 sentences 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials. 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials.	1	2006–2006
Murphy v. State green oklacrimapp · 2002 2 sentences 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials. 2006Murphy, 2002 OK CR 32, ¶ 31 , 54 P.3d at 568 ; Blonner, 2006 OK CR 1, ¶ 3 , 127 P.3d at 1139 ; Lambert, 2003 OK CR 11, ¶ 4 , 71 P.3d at 32 ; Bass, 2004 OK CR 14, ¶8 , 87 P.3d at 631-632 ; Myers, 2005 OK CR 22, ¶ 6 , 130 P.3d at 265 . ¶ 9 Contrary to Ochoa’s claim, we do not believe the principles underlying the Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins require this Court to overrule our decisions dealing with the burden and standard of proof in mental retardation jury trials.	1	2006–2006
Trent v. State neutral oklacrimapp · 1939 2 sentences 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917). 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917).	1	1993–1993
Buellesfeld v. Swaim neutral okla · 1917 2 sentences 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917). 1993See, e.g., City of Tulsa v. Stroud, 181 Okl. 525 , 75 P.2d 434, 435 (1938); Buellesfeld v. Swaim, 66 Okl. 302 , 168 P. 1166 (1917).	1	1993–1993
Lee v. State green oklacrimapp · 1982 2 sentences 1983The argument that any error was cured by counsels’ statements that the State had the burden of proof fails for two reasons: first, the jury is bound by the instructions as they are delivered by the trial court, not by statements by counsel of what the law is, Lee v. State, 655 P.2d 1046, 1982 ; and secondly, the instruction given explicitly shifted the burden to the defense, which would negate the argument the error was cured by counsels’ statements. 1983NOTES [1] The argument that any error was cured by counsels' statements that the State had the burden of proof fails for two reasons: first, the jury is bound by the instructions as they are delivered by the trial court, not by statements by counsel of what the law is, Lee v. State, 655 P.2d 1046, 1982 ; and secondly, the instruction given explicitly shifted the burden to the defense, which would negate the argument the error was cured by counsels' statements.	1	1983–1983
McDaniel v. State neutral · 1912 2 sentences 1978McDaniel v. State, 8 Okl.Cr. 209 , 127 P. 358 (1912); Price v. State, Okl. 1978McDaniel v. State, 8 Okl.Cr. 209 , 127 P. 358 (1912); Price v. State, Okl.	1	1978–1978
Application of Baggett green okla · 1974 1 sentence 1976We have said the burden or the test in these revocation cases under the Implied Consent Law is the “preponderance of the evidence.” Application of Baggett, Okl, 531 P.2d 1011 (1974).	1	1976–1976
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. United States green scotus · 1943 2 sentences 1975The Court in West felt that the decision in Oklahoma Tax Commission v. United States, 319 U.S. 598 , 63 S.Ct. 1284 , 87 L. 497 Ed. 1612 (1943) was controlling. 1975The Court in West felt that the decision in Oklahoma Tax Commission v. United States, 319 U.S. 598 , 63 S.Ct. 1284 , 87 L. 497 Ed. 1612 (1943) was controlling.	1	1975–1975
H & H SUPPLY CO. v. Bryant green okla · 1951 2 sentences 1956Standish Pipe Line Co. v. Kirkland, 188 Okl. 248 , 107 P.2d 1024 ; H & H Supply Co. v. Bryant, 204 Okl. 515 , 231 P.2d 685 . 1956Standish Pipe Line Co. v. Kirkland, 188 Okl. 248 , 107 P.2d 1024 ; H & H Supply Co. v. Bryant, 204 Okl. 515 , 231 P.2d 685 .	1	1956–1956
Standish Pipe Line Co. v. Kirkland green okla · 1940 2 sentences 1956Standish Pipe Line Co. v. Kirkland, 188 Okl. 248 , 107 P.2d 1024 ; H & H Supply Co. v. Bryant, 204 Okl. 515 , 231 P.2d 685 . 1956Standish Pipe Line Co. v. Kirkland, 188 Okl. 248 , 107 P.2d 1024 ; H & H Supply Co. v. Bryant, 204 Okl. 515 , 231 P.2d 685 .	1	1956–1956
Opelt v. Al. G. Barnes Co. green calctapp · 1919 1 sentence 1933Barnes, supra. The issue of contributory negligence constituted the burden of the defense in the instant case.	1	1933–1933

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 701.10 (3) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 701.7 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 138 (1919–2026) CA 133 (1907–2026) FL 61 (1955–2026) IL 53 (1915–2025) NY 46 (1923–2024) PA 42 (1908–2024) WA 41 (1967–2026) LA 34 (1959–2024) MA 32 (1964–2026) OH 27 (1984–2026) CT 27 (1990–2025) IA 24 (1937–2026) MD 20 (1964–2019) WI 18 (1952–2025) MS 16 (1945–2019) CO 16 (1972–2026) MO 16 (1930–2019) IN 15 (1974–2017) GA 15 (1949–2026) NJ 14 (1914–2021) WY 13 (1977–2022) MI 13 (1916–2025) OK 13 (1933–2020) MN 12 (1893–2014) AL 10 (1926–2005) DC 10 (1976–2018) AZ 10 (1982–2024) OR 9 (1990–2026) KS 9 (1933–2021) VT 7 (1980–2013) MT 6 (1923–2016) ND 6 (2001–2022) ME 6 (2016–2023) NH 5 (1976–2017) ID 5 (2014–2022) NC 5 (1940–2012) DE 5 (1990–2026) TN 5 (1958–2016) VA 5 (1983–2006) UT 4 (1999–2015) WV 4 (1994–2026) SC 4 (1922–2020) NV 4 (1993–2016) NM 4 (2014–2018) KY 3 (2005–2025) SD 3 (1919–1999) AR 3 (1960–1987) NE 3 (1961–2021) AK 3 (1973–2024) VI 2 (2012–2014) HI 2 (1910–2018)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check