supplemental instruction in Oklahoma

1924L. & S. F. Co. v. Crowell, 33 Okla. 773 , 127 Pac. 1063 , the second paragraph of the syllabus is: “Where an instruction is correct as far as it goes, and it is urged by a party that under his theory of the case additional instructions should have been given, a reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction is requested by such contendant embodying such theory.” In the case of C., R.

1915Co. v. Crowell, 33 Okla. 773 , 127 Pac. 1063 , this court held that where the instruction is correct so far as it goes, and it is urged by a party that under his theory of the case additional instructions should have been given, a reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction was requested by such party embodying such theory.

1924L. & S. F. Co. v. Crowell, 33 Okla. 773 , 127 Pac. 1063 , the second paragraph of the syllabus is: “Where an instruction is correct as far as it goes, and it is urged by a party that under his theory of the case additional instructions should have been given, a reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction is requested by such contendant embodying such theory.” In the case of C., R.

1915Co. v. Crowell, 33 Okla. 773 , 127 Pac. 1063 , this court held that where the instruction is correct so far as it goes, and it is urged by a party that under his theory of the case additional instructions should have been given, a reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction was requested by such party embodying such theory.

2004Citing to section 1175.1(3), this Court found the competency statutes “require only a determination that Appellant was competent to participate in criminal proceedings before his conviction.” See also Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338, 350 (Okl.Cr.), cert. denied 522 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 383 , 139 L.Ed.2d 299 (1997).

2004Citing to section 1175.1(3), this Court found the competency statutes “require only a determination that Appellant was competent to participate in criminal proceedings before his conviction.” See also Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338, 350 (Okl.Cr.), cert. denied 522 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 383 , 139 L.Ed.2d 299 (1997).

2004Citing to section 1175.1(3), this Court found the competency statutes “require only a determination that Appellant was competent to participate in criminal proceedings before his conviction.” See also Bryan v. State, 935 P.2d 338, 350 (Okl.Cr.), cert. denied 522 U.S. 957 , 118 S.Ct. 383 , 139 L.Ed.2d 299 (1997).

1936The Supreme Court, in the case of Finch v. American State Bank of Beggs, 97 Okla. 172 , 223 P. 631 , held: “The trial court has the right of its own motion or on the motion of counsel to correct or modify a charge which has been given to the jury.

1936The Supreme Court, in the case of Finch v. American State Bank of Beggs, 97 Okla. 172 , 223 P. 631 , held: “The trial court has the right of its own motion or on the motion of counsel to correct or modify a charge which has been given to the jury.

1924I. & P. v. Radford, 86 Okla. 657 , 129 Pac. 834 , the court said: “Where a special instruction is requested, it is the duty of counsel to prepare and submit to the court such desired instruction in writing properly numbered and signed, and upon timely delivery to the court requesting that it be given, upon a failure so to do, where the court has given general instructions applicable to the issues, and the evidence, this court will not consider as error the court’s failure to instruct of its own motion upon any given proposition.

1921The saving of exceptions thereto will not suffice, not being equivalent to a reauest for a fuller or more specific instruction.” In the case of Brown v. Motley, 51 Okla. 277 , 151 Pac. 1060 , it was held: “Where an. instruction is correct so far as it goes, and it is urged by the defendant that under his 'theory of the ease additional instructions should have been given, reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction is requested by such defendant embodying' such theory.” By applying the above rule to the case at bar, defendant waived his right to have the question of agency submit

1921The saving of exceptions thereto will not suffice, not being equivalent to a reauest for a fuller or more specific instruction.” In the case of Brown v. Motley, 51 Okla. 277 , 151 Pac. 1060 , it was held: “Where an. instruction is correct so far as it goes, and it is urged by the defendant that under his 'theory of the ease additional instructions should have been given, reversal will not be had unless a supplemental instruction is requested by such defendant embodying' such theory.” By applying the above rule to the case at bar, defendant waived his right to have the question of agency submit

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .

1912First National Bank of Muskogee v. Tevis et al., 29 Okla. 714 , 119 Pac. 218 ; Moore v. O’Dell, 27 Okla. 194 , 111 Pac. 308 ; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Baroni, 32 Okla. 540 , 122 Pac. 926 .