Okla. Stat. » Title 12 — CIVIL PROCEDURE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2602 (2026)

Personal knowledge

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may consist of the witness’s own testimony. This rule is subject to the provisions of Section 2703 of this title.

Added by Laws 1978, c. 285, § 602, eff. Oct. 1, 1978. Amended by Laws 2002, c. 468, § 42, eff. Nov. 1, 2002.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2021 · leading case: Badillo v. Mid Century Ins. Co., 2005 OK 48 (Okla. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Badillo v. Mid Century Ins. Co., 2005 OK 48 (Okla. 2005). · cites it 4× “Insurers place reliance for their argument(s) on 12 O.S. §§ 2602 and 2701, two provisions contained in the Oklahoma Evidence Code, 12 O.”
Harris v. State, 2019 OK CR 22 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “12 O.S.2011, § 2602. But reading Turner's testimony in full, we find no reason to believe she was not describing events that she witnessed.”
Gordon v. State, 2019 OK CR 24 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “12 O.S.2011, § 2602. "Every witness shall be required to declare before testifying that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness's conscience and impress the witness's mind with the duty to do so.”
Romano v. State, 909 P.2d 92 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “12 O.S.1981, § 2602. Hager v. State, 665 P.”
Malicoat v. State, 2000 OK CR 1 (Okla. Crim. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “[62] 12 O.S.1991, § 2602. [63] 12 O.S.1991, § 2701.”
Krimbill v. Talarico, 417 P.3d 1240 (Okla. Civ. App. 2017). “" 12 O.S.2011 § 2602. "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
Underwood v. State, 2011 OK CR 12 (Okla. Crim. App. 2011). “12 O.S.2001, §§ 2602, 2701; see Rogers v.”
Green v. State, 713 P.2d 1032 (Okla. Crim. App. 1985). “Subsection one of this statute must be read in conjunction with 12 O.S.1981, § 2602, which states: A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that he has personal knowledge of the matter.”
McCarty v. State, 765 P.2d 1215 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “” 12 O.S.1981, § 2602. No evidence was introduced that Ms.”
Johnson v. State, 727 P.2d 965 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “The objection was properly sustained on those grounds, 12 O.S.1981, § 2602. Arguing law concerning warrantless arrests and making an offer of proof would have been improper because such an argument is irrelevant to whether or not the question called for speculation.”
Martinez v. State, 1999 OK CR 33 (Okla. Crim. App. 1999). “” Furthermore, to be admissible, a witness’ testimony must be based upon personal knowledge, pursuant to 12 O.S.1991, § 2602, and must be relevant, i.”
Hill v. State, 672 P.2d 308 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983). “12 O.S.1981, § 2602. If the excluded évidence went to appellant’s personal knowledge of the victim’s criminal record, it was not apparent from the context, and appellant failed to *312 make an offer of proof.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.