Daugherty v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Duvall v. State

    780 P.2d 1178 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989)   Cited 16 times
    Holding audio tape recording of Appellant selling cocaine to another was not testimony by a witness and thus was to be treated as any other exhibit

    The decision to allow a jury to take exhibits with them to the jury room is within the discretion of the trial court. Daugherty v. State, 640 P.2d 558, 561 (Okla.Cr. 1982). Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the trial court has abused this discretion.

  2. Pebeahsy v. State

    742 P.2d 1162 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987)   Cited 2 times

    The appellant further claims that since Exhibit 20C, the comparison photograph, contained the thumbprint derived from excluded Exhibit 20B, the jurors were permitted to take inadmissible evidence into the jury room. We begin by observing that the admission of relevant evidence is within the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion. Daugherty v. State, 640 P.2d 558, 562 (Okla. Cr. 1982). See also 12 O.S. 1981 ยงยง 2401[ 12-2401], 2402. State's Exhibit 20C was independently readmitted into evidence when Defense Exhibit number 1, a copy of the appellant's fingerprint card, was admitted into evidence.