Murphy v. State
2012 OK CR 8
Okla. Crim. App.2012Background
- Murphy convicted of first-degree murder in Oklahoma and sentenced to death; direct appeal affirmed.”
- Post-conviction relief denied in prior proceedings; mental retardation claim unresolved.
- Remanded in 2005 for jury trial on mental retardation; other claims denied.
- Jury trial on remand held in Sept. 2009; verdict found Murphy not mentally retarded but was mistried for improper peremptory challenges.
- State filed Renewed Motion to Terminate Further Proceedings under 21 O.S. Supp. 2006, §701.10b; district court terminated on Jan. 27, 2011.
- Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals reviews four propositions challenging termination and application of §701.10b(C); Court affirms district court’s termination and denial of relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remand compliance with court mandate | Murphy | State | Proposition denied; district court properly followed §701.10b and remand order prosecutors. |
| Due process and termination of proceedings | Murphy asserts denial of jury trial rights | State argues lawful termination under statute | Plain-error and due-process claims rejected; statute applied properly. |
| Substantive due process and risk of executing the mentally retarded | Murphy argues unsettled MR claim risks execution | State asserts established thresholds and procedures. | No due-process violation; threshold requirements not met. |
| Constitutionality/ex post facto challenge to §701.10b | Murphy contends §701.10b(C) unconstitutional | State defends statute as constitutional | Statute sustained; not unconstitutional ex post facto under cited authorities. |
| Eligibility threshold under §701.10b(C) | Murphy exceeded IQ thresholds (80, 82) | Two IQs above 76 preclude MR status | Threshold not satisfied; no MR; no jury trial required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Murphy v. State, 47 P.3d 876 (Okla. 2002) (direct appeal affirmance of murder conviction and death sentence)
- Murphy v. State, 54 P.3d 556 (Okla. 2002) (post-conviction denial; MR claim unresolved)
- Smith v. State, 245 P.3d 1233 (Okla. 2010) ( Smith governs death-penalty and MR procedures under §701.10b)
- Salazar v. State, 84 P.3d 764 (Okla. 2004) (remand/remand-procedure guidance for MR determinations)
- Salazar v. State, 126 P.3d 625 (Okla. 2005) (post-remand MR review guidance)
- Pickens v. State, 126 P.3d 612 (Okla. 2005) (plain-error review after MR proceedings)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (U.S. 2002) (capital punishment limits for mentally retarded defendants)
- Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (U.S. 1986) (procedural due process related to insanity defenses)
- Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (U.S. 2007) (due-process protections in capital cases upon substantial insanity showing)
- James v. State, 204 P.3d 793 (Okla. 2009) (ex post facto considerations in MR context)