In the absence of evidence sufficient to prove abandonment of the criminal enterprise, the State is not obligated to prove appellant did not withdraw. By his own testimony, appellant did not withdraw from the criminal scheme. Daniels v. State, 558 P.2d 405 (Okla. Cr. 1977). He stayed with the group the entire night hiding, and also with the group secreting the guns they had stolen. Withdrawal requires letting the other parties know of one's abandonment and doing everything in one's power to prevent the commission of the crime.
Broadway v. State, 494 P.2d 331, 336 (Okla. Cr. 1972) and the term "term of court" no longer has a statutory meaning. Daniels v. State, 558 P.2d 405 (Okla. Cr. 1977). On April 25, 1979, the defendant, along with a co-defendant (Gritzmaker), was charged with Armed Robbery of a Ponca City liquor store.
Considering the length of delay, which was caused primarily by request of the defendant, and since defendant has totally failed to show in any manner how he was prejudiced, we find this assignment of error to be without merit. See State ex rel. Trusty v. Graham, Okla. Cr. 525 P.2d 1231 (1974) and Daniels v. State, Okla. Cr. 558 P.2d 405 (1977). Defendant contends in his second assignment of error that the trial court erred in sustaining the State's motion to require him to submit to the giving of blood, saliva and hair samples.