United States Tenth Circuit

Denial of habeas relief in a first-degree murder case is affirmed as: 1) for purposes of a claim that petitioner was not sane at the time of the offense, there was enough evidence at trial for the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that petitioner could distinguish right from wrong at the time of his offense; and 2) a state court's denial of relief, on a claim that his due process rights were violated because the court did not instruct the jury about the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity, was not contrary to federal constitutional law set forth by the Supreme Court.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/02/2007
• Published 11/02/2007

Judges

• HARTZ, Circuit Judge., Before HENRY, LUCERO, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Burke Mordy, Mordy & Mordy, P.C., Ardmore, OK, (Andrea D. Miller, Oklahoma City, OK, and Phil S. Hurst, Hurst, McNeil & Gordon, Sulphur, OK, with him on the brief), for Petitioner-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Keeley Lane Harris, Assistant Attorney General (W.A. Drew Edmonson, Attorney General, with him on the brief), Oklahoma City, OK, for Respondent-Appellee.