ROBERTS v. STATE

Annotate this Case

ROBERTS v. STATE
1972 OK CR 222
501 P.2d 220
Case Number: A-17549
Decided: 09/13/1972
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

An appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County; Charles L. Owens, Judge.

Melvin Louis Roberts was convicted for the offense of Robbery with Firearms, After Former Conviction of a Felony, sentenced to forty (40) years imprisonment, and he appeals. Judgment and sentence affirmed.

Don Anderson, Public Defender, Oklahoma County, for appellant.

Larry Derryberry, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

BUSSEY, Presiding Judge:

¶1 Appellant, Melvin Louis Roberts, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged, tried and convicted in the District Court of Oklahoma County, for the offense of Robbery with Firearms, After Former Conviction of a Felony; his punishment was fixed at forty (40) years imprisonment, and from said judgment and sentence, a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.

¶2 Defendant was tried jointly with Co-defendants Ricky Leon Green and Eddie Dean Taylor. We do not deem it necessary to reiterate the statement of facts as the same was set forth in Green v. State, Okl.Cr., 501 P.2d 219.

¶3 The first proposition contends that the verdict is not supported by the evidence. We have consistently held that where there is competent evidence in the record from which the jury could reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty as charged, this Court will not interfere with the verdict even though there is a sharp conflict in the evidence and different inferences may be drawn therefrom, since it is the exclusive province of the jury to weigh the evidence and determine the facts. Jones v. State, Okl.Cr., 468 P.2d 805.

¶4 The second proposition contends that the punishment is excessive. Suffice it to say that we cannot conscientiously say that under all facts and circumstances the sentence is so excessive as to shock the conscience of this Court.

¶5 The judgment and sentence is accordingly affirmed.

SIMMS and BRETT, JJ., concur.

 

 

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.