Okla. Stat. » Title 10 — CHILDREN
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 10, § 1102 (2026)

Renumbered as § 7303-1.2 of this title by Laws 1995, c

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

352, § 199, eff. July 1, 1995.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1974–2016 · leading case: Davis v. Davis, 708 P.2d 1102 (Okla. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Davis v. Davis, 708 P.2d 1102 (Okla. 1985). “The terms of 10 O.S.1981 § 1102(A) provide that “[u]pon the filing of a petition, the district court shall have jurisdiction of any child .”
Price v. Price, 573 P.2d 251 (Okla. 1977). · cites it 2× “1971 , §§ 1115, 1116); because it is only after making the adjudication that the court has jurisdiction over the child (10 O.S.Supp. 1972, § 1102). It is the adjudicatory hearing which determines whether or not the state, through its juvenile court, shall interfere with the…”
Stratton v. Steele, 519 P.2d 468 (Okla. 1974). · cites it 4× “BERRY, Justice (specially concurring): I believe 10 O.S.Supp. 1972 § 1102, confers jurisdiction in the District Court of Okmulgee County in the present case.”
Carney v. Moore, 754 P.2d 863 (Okla. 1988). “10 O.S.1981 § 1102. The mother appeared with counsel in the proceedings.”
Matter of Adoption of BKJ, 639 P.2d 611 (Okla. 1982). “The Rogers contend that the divorce proceedings were consolidated with the adoption proceedings by order of the district court pursuant to 10 O.S.Supp. 1978, § 1102. However, the transfer or consolidation of proceedings involving children therein referred to clearly relates to…”
In re C. G., 637 P.2d 66 (Okla. 1981). “It does not change the standard of proof in (a) deprived-status proceedings, 10 O.S.Supp.1977 § 1102; (b) any proceedings under the provisions of 10 O.”
Matter of CG, 637 P.2d 66 (Okla. 1981). “It does not change the standard of proof in (a) deprived-status proceedings, 10 O.S.Supp. 1977 § 1102; (b) any proceedings under the provisions of 10 O.”
Brown v. State, 550 P.2d 963 (Okla. Crim. App. 1976). “The juvenile court is referred to the provisions of 10 O.S. § 1102 which reads in pertinent part as follows, to-wit: “When jurisdiction shall have been obtained over any child, it may be retained until the child becomes twenty-one (21) years of age.”
Mook v. City of Tulsa, 565 P.2d 1065 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “See, 10 O.S.Supp.1972, § 1102; 10 O.S.Supp. 1976, § 1103.”
Matter of As, 811 P.2d 910 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991). “[13] Title 10 O.S.Supp. 1981 § 1102(A). [14] Title 10 O.”
Purnell v. State, 561 P.2d 109 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “Title 10 O.S.Supp.1972, § 1102 expressly states, “When jurisdiction shall have been obtained over any child, it may be retained until the child becomes twenty-one (21) years of age .”
J. A. M. v. State, 598 P.2d 1207 (Okla. Crim. App. 1979). “If then this juvenile had been adjudicated delinquent, the court could have retained jurisdiction over him until he reached the age of 19 years and required specific treatment such as counseling, 10 O.S.Supp.1978, § 1102. However, since we can find no abuse of discretion on the…”
Show all 28 citing cases →
Okla. Stat. tit. 10, § 1102(A): 3 cases
Davis v. Davis, 708 P.2d 1102 (Okla. 1985). “The terms of 10 O.S.1981 § 1102(A) provide that “[u]pon the filing of a petition, the district court shall have jurisdiction of any child .”
Matter of As, 811 P.2d 910 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991). “[13] Title 10 O.S.Supp. 1981 § 1102(A). [14] Title 10 O.”
Sanders v. State, 811 P.2d 910 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.