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. Hossein Assadollah
Date: 07-08-1981
Case Number: CRF-77-1291
Judge: Floyd L. Martin
Court: District Court, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney: Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, District Attorney's Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Oklahoma City Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory
Description:
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with first-degree murder.
At about 7:30 on the morning of April 4, 1977, Mary Heath and her son Michael J. Higgenbotham left their home on their way to work, traveling at a rate of about 20 miles per hour on Grand Boulevard in Oklahoma City. As they approached S.W. 18th Street, they observed a green Chevrolet parked in the parking lot of the Kerr Village Apartment Complex. They both observed what appeared to be a fight taking place in the vehicle. Mrs. Heath drove a short way down the street, turned around and passed by the vehicle again. As they passed the vehicle a second time, the male in the green Chevrolet appeared to sit upright and look out the windshield directly at them. They proceeded back to their home and Michael Higgenbotham went into the house to call the police. Mrs. Heath remained in front of her home so that she could continue to observe the activities in the Chevrolet; she saw a man leave the Chevrolet, enter another vehicle and depart from the area. Shortly thereafter Oklahoma City Police Officer Larry Foreman arrived. He was directed to the green Chevrolet by Michael Higgenbotham where he found the body of the victim, Tami Jo Assadollah.
* * *
In his first assignment of error, the appellant asserts that the trial court erred in admitting four color photographs of the victim's body. The appellant argues not only that the photographs were highly inflammatory, but also that they had no probative value.
The rule is that admissibility of demonstrative evidence such as photographs is a question of legal relevance for the trial court. When the probative value is not outweighed by the danger of prejudice to the defendant, the photographs are admissible. Oxendine v. State, 335 P.2d 940 (Okl.Cr. 1958).
At about 7:30 on the morning of April 4, 1977, Mary Heath and her son Michael J. Higgenbotham left their home on their way to work, traveling at a rate of about 20 miles per hour on Grand Boulevard in Oklahoma City. As they approached S.W. 18th Street, they observed a green Chevrolet parked in the parking lot of the Kerr Village Apartment Complex. They both observed what appeared to be a fight taking place in the vehicle. Mrs. Heath drove a short way down the street, turned around and passed by the vehicle again. As they passed the vehicle a second time, the male in the green Chevrolet appeared to sit upright and look out the windshield directly at them. They proceeded back to their home and Michael Higgenbotham went into the house to call the police. Mrs. Heath remained in front of her home so that she could continue to observe the activities in the Chevrolet; she saw a man leave the Chevrolet, enter another vehicle and depart from the area. Shortly thereafter Oklahoma City Police Officer Larry Foreman arrived. He was directed to the green Chevrolet by Michael Higgenbotham where he found the body of the victim, Tami Jo Assadollah.
* * *
In his first assignment of error, the appellant asserts that the trial court erred in admitting four color photographs of the victim's body. The appellant argues not only that the photographs were highly inflammatory, but also that they had no probative value.
The rule is that admissibility of demonstrative evidence such as photographs is a question of legal relevance for the trial court. When the probative value is not outweighed by the danger of prejudice to the defendant, the photographs are admissible. Oxendine v. State, 335 P.2d 940 (Okl.Cr. 1958).
Outcome:
The Defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to life in prison.
Affirmed
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of State of Oklahoma v. Hossein Assadollah?
The outcome was: The Defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to life in prison. Affirmed
Which court heard State of Oklahoma v. Hossein Assadollah?
This case was heard in District Court, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, OK. The presiding judge was Floyd L. Martin.
Who were the attorneys in State of Oklahoma v. Hossein Assadollah?
Plaintiff's attorney: Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, District Attorney's Office. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Oklahoma City Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory.
When was State of Oklahoma v. Hossein Assadollah decided?
This case was decided on July 8, 1981.