Unlocking Justice: Appeals in Oklahoma
Strickland Test: Your Route to Post-Conviction Hope
In part two of his five-part series, Oklahoma City Attorney Aaron Easton explores the Strickland Test and its role in post-conviction relief for criminal defendants in Oklahoma. The landmark United States Supreme Court case of Strickland v. Washington established a two-part test that determines whether a petitioner is eligible for relief. The first prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that their counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. The second prong necessitates showing that they suffered prejudice due to their counsel's deficient performance. Easton promises to delve deeper into the specifics of these prongs in future videos. If you believe you may be a good candidate for post-conviction relief, Easton offers a initial consultation at his firm. Read more »
Have You Received Inadequate Representation in Oklahoma?
Are you one of the many individuals who received inadequate representation at your trial in Oklahoma? If you're questioning the outcome of your conviction and wondering if there's any recourse, Attorney Aaron Easton has answers for you. In this five-part series, he explores the topic of ineffective assistance of counsel, which primarily concerns trial counsel but also includes appellate counsel. Fortunately, there is potential for recourse under the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Act statutes. By appealing to the district court where you were sentenced, you can seek post-conviction relief, such as overturning your case or obtaining a new trial. Reach out to Aaron Easton's firm for a initial consultation to discuss your options. Read more »
Can I Withdraw My Guilty Plea from a Previous Conviction in Oklahoma?
Are you wondering if you can withdraw a guilty plea from a previous conviction in Oklahoma? Attorney Aaron Easton from Oklahoma City addresses this question in his latest blog post. He explains that the United States Supreme Court recognizes your constitutional right to withdraw a plea if it wasn't both knowing and voluntary. However, there is a legal definition for knowing and voluntary that may differ from our common understanding. Easton discusses a two-pronged test established by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to determine when you might be able to withdraw your plea. If you believe your plea was not knowing and voluntary, it is crucial to consult an attorney to discuss the specifics of your case. Read more »
What Can I Do if I Pled Guilty to a Crime I’m Not Guilty of in Oklahoma?
If you've pled guilty to a crime in Oklahoma, even if you're not guilty, you may be wondering if there's anything you can do about it. Oklahoma City Attorney Aaron Easton addresses this common question in today's blog post. He explains that many defendants feel pressured to plea guilty in order to avoid harsher penalties, leading them to admit to crimes they didn't commit. However, there is a possibility to withdraw a plea if it was not knowing and voluntary. Easton discusses the constitutional right to not plead guilty to crimes you're not guilty for and the criteria that need to be met to prove that the plea was not knowing and voluntary. While it's a challenging process, consulting with an attorney can help navigate the specifics of your case. Read more »
Material Evidence vs. Post-Conviction Relief in Oklahoma
In this blog post, Oklahoma City Attorney Aaron Easton delves into the concept of material evidence in the context of post-conviction relief in Oklahoma. He discusses the definition of material evidence and its importance in determining whether a person convicted of a crime is eligible for relief based on newly discovered evidence. Easton explains that material evidence is evidence that, if utilized by the defense, could have potentially changed the outcome of the trial. He also highlights the holistic approach taken by the court in assessing the impact of newly discovered evidence, considering both old and new evidence as a whole. If you find yourself in a situation where you believe you have newly discovered evidence, Easton advises seeking the help of an attorney to discuss your case confidentially. Read more »
Can I Get Post-conviction Relief if There Is New Evidence in an Oklahoma Case I Was Convicted In?
In this blog post, Oklahoma City Attorney Aaron Easton explores the possibility of post-conviction relief for individuals convicted in Oklahoma cases with newly discovered evidence. Easton discusses the criteria set forth by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, including the materiality of the evidence, its reasonable probability of changing the outcome, and its non-cumulative nature. He highlights the importance of speaking to an attorney to discuss the specifics of one's case and to determine if post-conviction relief is a viable option. Easton's firm offers a initial consultation for those seeking assistance with their post-conviction cases. Read more »
"Factual Innocence Claims Lie at the Heart of the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act"?
In Oklahoma, factual innocence claims play a crucial role in the state's Post-Conviction Procedure Act. Attorney Aaron Easton highlights the significance of these claims, citing a landmark case that underscores the right of Oklahoma citizens to seek relief from their convictions when new evidence emerges. The Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act, outlined in Title 22, Section 1080 of the state's statutes, allows for the consideration of newly discovered evidence that supports a defendant's factual innocence. However, recent changes have made it more challenging to apply for post-conviction relief, introducing a one-year statute of limitations. Easton advises individuals who believe they have evidence proving their innocence to consult with an attorney to explore their options for post-conviction relief. Read more »