circumstance. In the sentencing proceeding, the statutory instructions as determined by the trial judge to be warranted by the evidence shall be given in the charge and in writing to the jury for its deliberation. The jury, if its verdict be a unanimous recommendation of death, shall designate in writing, signed by the foreman of the jury, the statutory aggravating circumstance or circumstances which it unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt. In nonjury cases the judge shall make such designation. Unless at least one of the statutory aggravating circumstances enumerated in this act is so found or if it is found that any such aggravating circumstance is outweighed by the finding of one or more mitigating circumstances, the death penalty shall not be imposed. If the jury cannot, within a reasonable time, agree as to punishment, the judge shall dismiss the jury and impose a sentence of imprisonment for life without parole or imprisonment for life. Amended by Laws 1987, c. 96, § 3, eff. Nov. 1, 1987.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
105
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case:
Irvin v. State, 617 P.2d 588 (Okla. Crim. App. 1980).
Irvin v. State, 617 P.2d 588 (Okla. Crim. App. 1980).
· cites it 8× “1, § 5, now 21 O.S.Supp. 1979, § 701.11, [4] the appellant argues error in the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury of the right to decline imposition of the death *598 penalty.”
Hooks v. State, 2001 OK CR 1 (Okla. Crim. App. 2001).
· cites it 5× “¶ 7 The Court's opinion in this case seems to infer "recent" changes to 21 O.S.1991, § 701.11, which necessitate this Court's ruling regarding the requirement to give OUJI-CR (2d) 4-83.”
Hooks v. Workman, 606 F.3d 715 (10th Cir. 2010).
· cites it 4× “Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 701.11 (providing that "[i]f the jury cannot, within a reasonable time, agree as to punishment, the judge shall dismiss the jury and impose a sentence of imprisonment for life" with or without parole); see also Lowenfield, 484 U.”
Mollett v. Mullin, 348 F.3d 902 (10th Cir. 2003).
· cites it 6× “” Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 701.12 . Oklahoma law provides for three possibilities when a defendant is charged with a crime for which the prosecution seeks the death penalty.”
Davis v. State, 665 P.2d 1186 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983).
· cites it 5× “Particularly arguing that the jury was not instructed properly under 21 O.S.Supp. 1976, § 701.11 that they may refuse to impose the sentence of death after finding the presence of an aggravating circumstance which outweighs mitigating circumstances, appellant demands reversal.”
Mitchell v. State, 2006 OK CR 20 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006).
· cites it 4× “" [179] Mitchell argues that under 21 O.S.2001, § 701.11, the jury's finding that any aggravating circumstances in the case "outweigh" any mitigating circumstanceslike the jury's finding that one or more aggravating circumstances existmust be made "beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Underwood v. Royal, 894 F.3d 1154 (10th Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “" Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 701.11 . The Matthews petitioner sought habeas relief based on the trial court's punishment stage jury instructions, arguing that the jury should "have been instructed that it had to find beyond a reasonable doubt that aggravating factors outweighed the…”
Romano v. State, 847 P.2d 368 (Okla. Crim. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “ISSUES RELATING TO PUNISHMENT Title 21 O.S.1981, § 701.11, provides in part that if a jury returns a verdict of death, “it shall designate in writing .”
Jay Wesley Neill v. Gary Gibson, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary, 278 F.3d 1044 (10th Cir. 2001).
· cites it 2× “) This instruction was in accord with Oklahoma’s statutory sentencing scheme, see Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 701.11 , and Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals cases, which have “repeatedly held that [it] will not establish specific standards for the balancing of aggravating and…”
Ellis v. State, 867 P.2d 1289 (Okla. Crim. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “21 O.S.Supp. 1988, § 701.11. Each request was refused.”
Wilson v. Sirmons, 536 F.3d 1064 (10th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 701.11 . At the penalty phase of Mr.”
Torres v. State, 2002 OK CR 35 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002).
· cites it 3× “21 O.S.2001, § 701.11. A capital jury trial maybe waived.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.