## Facts

- Zola V. Truesdell was charged in Nowata County, Oklahoma, as an accessory after the fact to shooting with intent to kill.
- The alleged principal was Truesdell’s twelve-year-old son, who shot Truesdell’s ex-husband multiple times.
- After a preliminary hearing, Truesdell was bound over for trial.
- On a defense motion after the preliminary hearing, the district court dismissed the information, reasoning that a juvenile cannot commit a felony and therefore there was no felony to support an accessory-after-the-fact charge.
- The State appealed the dismissal to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether an accessory-after-the-fact prosecution may proceed when the alleged principal is a juvenile who cannot be convicted as an adult felon.
2. Whether the district court’s dismissal, based on preliminary-hearing evidence rather than defects on the face of the information, should be treated as sustaining a motion to quash.

## Decision

- The appellate court treated the district court’s ruling as an order sustaining a motion to quash because it rested on evidence from the preliminary hearing, not on the face of the information.
- The appellate court reversed the dismissal and remanded with the prosecution reinstated.
- The court held that the juvenile’s status does not eliminate the existence of a predicate felony for accessory-after-the-fact purposes.
- The court concluded the preliminary-hearing evidence was sufficient to show a completed felony, Truesdell’s knowledge of it, and her alleged concealment or assistance to the shooter.

## Legal Principles

- Accessory after the fact requires: (1) completion of a predicate felony; (2) the accessory’s knowledge that the principal committed the felony; and (3) concealment of, or aid to, the principal.
- Accessory-after-the-fact liability is a separate offense and does not depend on the principal’s conviction, charging status, or ability to be convicted as an adult.
- For the predicate-felony element, the relevant question is whether conduct constituting a felony occurred in fact; a principal’s juvenile status affects prosecutability and procedure, not the character of the act.
- A ruling that turns on the sufficiency of preliminary-hearing evidence is properly analyzed as sustaining a motion to quash rather than sustaining a demurrer to the information.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated the accessory-after-the-fact prosecution, holding that a juvenile’s inability to be convicted as an adult does not negate the completed felony required to support accessory-after-the-fact liability, and that the district court improperly dismissed the case based on preliminary-hearing evidence.


State v. Truesdell, 620 P.2d 427 (Okla. Crim. App. 1980)