Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

State of Oklahoma v. Garland Arthur Williams

Date: 03-27-2025

Case Number: CF-2023-158

Judge: Pazzo, Stephen R

Court: In the District Court in and for Rogers County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Rogers County District Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:







Click Here For The Best Claremore Criminal Dedfense Lawyer Directory







Description:
Claremore, Oklahoma criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with:



Count # 1.

Count as Filed: HM11, MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE-FELONY MURDER/AMENDED, in violation of 21 O.S. 701.7

Date of Offense: 08/31/2022

Williams, Garland Arthur Samuel

Disposed: CONVICTION, 03/27/2025. Nolo Contendere Plea

Count as Disposed: MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE(HM12)

Violation of 21 O.S. 701.8

Count # 2.

Count as Filed: DU8II, DISTRIBUTION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE (FENTANYL), in violation of 63 O.S. 2-401(A)(1)

Date of Offense: 08/31/2022

Williams, Garland Arthur Samuel

Disposed: CONVICTION, 03/27/2025. Nolo Contendere Plea

Count as Disposed: DISTRIBUTION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE (FENTANYL)(DU8II)

Violation of 63 O.S. 2-401(A)(1)



MoreLaw's goal is to help people seeking legal assistance to find the best lawyers available to represent them in any county in the United States. Click the link above to see some lawyers available where this case was tried who might be available to represent you.

Outcome:
CASE COMES ON FOR DISPOSITION; DEFENDANT SWORN & ADVISED OF RIGHTS; MATTER OF GRIEVANCE LETTER COMES OVER COURT; COURT CONFIRMS MATTER RESOLVED AND MOOT; DEFENDANT FOUND COMPETENT TO DO SO; DEFENDANT ENTERS PLEA OF NO CONTEST; COURT ACCEPTS PLEA FINDING THAT IS WAS FREELY, VOLUNTARILY & KNOWLINGLY GIVEN UNDER GOOD LEGAL COUNSEL; COURT SENTENCES AS FOLLOWS

DEFENDANT ADVISED IN OPEN COURT 85% CRIME

PURSUANT TO PLEA AGREEMENT COUNT 1 AMENDED TO FELONY MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE PURUANT TO OS 21.701.8

CT 1: 35 YEARS DOC + $500 FINE + $250 VCA + COURT COSTS

CT 2: 35 YEARS DOC + $500 FINE + $250 VCA + COURT COSTS

COUNTS TO RUN CONCURRENT, CASE TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH CF-22-383

DEFENDANT TO RECEIVE CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED FROM 9-6-2022

VIP STATEMENTS READ ALOUD; DEFENDANT ADVISED OF RIGHT TO APPEAL; BOND EXONERATED; DEFENDANT REQUESTS IMMEDIATE TRANSPORT; DEFENDANT ORDERED TO REPORT TO COURT CLERK WITHIN 180 DAYS OF RELEASE TO ESTABLISH PAYMENT PLAN

Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of State of Oklahoma v. Garland Arthur Williams?

The outcome was: CASE COMES ON FOR DISPOSITION; DEFENDANT SWORN & ADVISED OF RIGHTS; MATTER OF GRIEVANCE LETTER COMES OVER COURT; COURT CONFIRMS MATTER RESOLVED AND MOOT; DEFENDANT FOUND COMPETENT TO DO SO; DEFENDANT ENTERS PLEA OF NO CONTEST; COURT ACCEPTS PLEA FINDING THAT IS WAS FREELY, VOLUNTARILY & KNOWLINGLY GIVEN UNDER GOOD LEGAL COUNSEL; COURT SENTENCES AS FOLLOWS DEFENDANT ADVISED IN OPEN COURT 85% CRIME PURSUANT TO PLEA AGREEMENT COUNT 1 AMENDED TO FELONY MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE PURUANT TO OS 21.701.8 CT 1: 35 YEARS DOC + $500 FINE + $250 VCA + COURT COSTS CT 2: 35 YEARS DOC + $500 FINE + $250 VCA + COURT COSTS COUNTS TO RUN CONCURRENT, CASE TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH CF-22-383 DEFENDANT TO RECEIVE CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED FROM 9-6-2022 VIP STATEMENTS READ ALOUD; DEFENDANT ADVISED OF RIGHT TO APPEAL; BOND EXONERATED; DEFENDANT REQUESTS IMMEDIATE TRANSPORT; DEFENDANT ORDERED TO REPORT TO COURT CLERK WITHIN 180 DAYS OF RELEASE TO ESTABLISH PAYMENT PLAN

Which court heard State of Oklahoma v. Garland Arthur Williams?

This case was heard in In the District Court in and for Rogers County, Oklahoma, OK. The presiding judge was Pazzo, Stephen R.

Who were the attorneys in State of Oklahoma v. Garland Arthur Williams?

Plaintiff's attorney: Rogers County District Attorney’s Office. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Claremore Criminal Dedfense Lawyer Directory.

When was State of Oklahoma v. Garland Arthur Williams decided?

This case was decided on March 27, 2025.