509 P2D 486 - Roselle v. State

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1997

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

BRETT, Judge

¶1(specially concurring):

¶2I concur in this decision. However, I feel compelled again to state my position *489that this Court’s decision in Roselle v. State, Okl.Cr., 503 P.2d 1293 (1972) should be overruled, but my admonitions are cast upon deaf ears. In response to my contentions, I am informed concerning contempt appeals that the Writ of Mandamus may be obtained to cause the trial judge to insert a “formal judgment and sentence” into the record when such is not contained in the original record.

¶3Therefore, I admonish trial attorneys, when contempt proceedings are encountered that they must insist that the trial judge insert a printed formal judgment and sentence form into the original record for appeal, if the appeal is to be taken to this Court. Otherwise, the purported appeal will be dismissed because of the absence thereof.

¶4I concur in this decision. The same results should have been reached when the appeal was initially considered by this Court.