Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803 (2026)

Hearsay exceptions - Availability of declarant

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

immaterial. The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness: 1. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter; 2. A statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition; 3. A statement of the declarant's then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation or physical condition, such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain and bodily health, but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution, revocation, identification or terms of declarant's will; 4. Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present

symptoms, pain or sensations, if reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or treatment; 5. A record concerning a matter about which a witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection to testify fully and accurately, shown to have been made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness’s memory and to reflect that knowledge correctly. The record may be read into evidence but may not itself be received as an exhibit unless offered by an adverse party; 6. A record of acts, events, conditions, opinions or diagnosis, made at or near the time by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the record, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, or by certification that complies with paragraph 11 or 12 of Section 2902 of this title, or with a statute providing for certification, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. The term "business" as used in this paragraph includes business, institution, association, profession, occupation and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for profit. A public record inadmissible under paragraph 8 of this section is inadmissible under this exception; 7. Evidence that a matter is not included in records kept in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 6 of this section, to prove the nonoccurrence or nonexistence of the matter, if the matter was of a kind of which a record was regularly made and preserved, or by certification that complies with paragraph 11 or 12 of Section 2902 of this title, or with a statute providing for certification, unless the sources of information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness; 8. To the extent not otherwise provided in this paragraph, a record of a public office or agency setting forth its regularly conducted and regularly recorded activities or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law and as to which there was a duty to report, or factual finding resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law. The following are not within this exception to the hearsay rule: a. investigative reports by police and other law enforcement personnel, b. investigative reports prepared by or for a government, a public office or agency when offered by it in a case in which it is a party, c. factual findings offered by the government in criminal cases,

d. factual findings resulting from special investigation of a particular complaint, case or incident, or e. any matter as to which the sources of information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness; 9. Records of births, fetal deaths, deaths or marriages, if the report thereof was made to a public office pursuant to statutory requirements; 10. To prove the absence of a record or the nonoccurrence or nonexistence of a matter of which a record was regularly made and preserved by a public office or agency, evidence in the form of a certification in accordance with Section 2903 of this title, or testimony, that diligent search failed to disclose the record or entry; 11. Statements of births, marriages, divorces, deaths, legitimacy, ancestry, relationship by blood or marriage or other similar facts of personal or family history contained in a regularly kept record of a religious organization; 12. Statements of fact contained in a certified record that the maker performed a marriage or other ceremony or administered a sacrament, made by a cleric, public official or other person authorized by the rules or practices of a religious organization or by law to perform the act certified and purporting to have been issued at the time of the act or within a reasonable time thereafter; 13. Statements of fact concerning personal or family history including those contained in family Bibles, genealogy, charts, engravings on rings, inscriptions on family portraits, engravings on urns, crypts or tombstones, or the like; 14. A public record purporting to establish or affect an interest in property, as proof of the content of the original recorded document and its execution and delivery by each person by whom it purports to have been executed and delivered; 15. A statement contained in a record purporting to establish or affect an interest in property if the matter stated was relevant to the purpose of the record unless dealings with the property since the record was made have been inconsistent with the truth of the statement or the purport of the record; 16. Statements in a record in existence twenty (20) years or more, the authenticity of which is established; 17. Market quotations, tabulations, lists, directories or other published or publicly recorded compilations generally used and relied upon by the public or by persons in particular occupations; 18. To the extent called to the attention of an expert witness upon cross-examination or relied upon by the witness in direct examination, statements contained in published treatises, periodicals or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine or other science or art, established as a reliable authority by the testimony

or admission of the witness or by other expert testimony or by judicial notice. If admitted, the statements may be read into evidence but may not be received as exhibits; 19. Reputation among members of an individual’s family by blood, adoption or marriage, or among the individual’s associates, or in the community, concerning a person's birth, adoption, marriage, divorce, death, legitimacy, relationship by blood, adoption or marriage, ancestry or other similar fact of the individual’s personal or family history; 20. Reputation in a community, arising before the controversy, as to boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community and reputation as to events of general history important to the community or state or nation in which located; 21. Reputation of a person's character among the person’s associates or in the community; 22. Evidence of a final judgment, but not upon a plea of nolo contendere, adjudging a person guilty of a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one (1) year, to prove any fact essential to sustain the judgment, but not including, when offered by the state in a criminal prosecution for purposes other than impeachment, judgments against persons other than the accused. The pendency of an appeal may be shown but does not affect admissibility; 23. Judgments as proof of matters of personal, family or general history, or boundaries, essential to the judgment, if the matter would be provable by evidence of reputation; or 24. A verified or declared written medical report signed by a physician, provided: a. the report is used in an action not arising out of contract in which the claim of the plaintiff is not in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), b. the report contains a history of the plaintiff, the complaints of the plaintiff, the physician’s findings on examination, and any diagnostic tests, description and cause of the injury, and the nature and extent of any permanent impairment. All opinions expressed in the report must be based upon a reasonable degree of medical probability, and c. the medical report must be verified or contain a written declaration, made under the penalty of perjury, that the report is true. Added by Laws 1978, c. 285, § 803, eff. Oct. 1, 1978. Amended by Laws 2002, c. 468, § 59, eff. Nov. 1, 2002; Laws 2004, c. 519, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2004.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 123 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Thompson v. State, 2019 OK CR 3, 438 P.3d 373.
Thompson v. State, 2019 OK CR 3, 438 P.3d 373. · cites it 15× “12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2). This issue has been preserved for appellate review.”
Charm v. State, 924 P.2d 754 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “Under 12 O.S.1991, § 2803(8), records, reports, statements or data compilations in any form of a public office or agency setting forth its regularly conducted and regularly recorded activities or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law and as to which there was a duty…”
Tryon v. State, 2018 OK CR 20, 423 P.3d 617. · cites it 3× “The first two sentences ("It's okay bc im [sic] going to tell the truth tomorrow.”
Thompson v. State, 438 P.3d 373 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “was unavailable and Thompson never had an opportunity to cross-examine her. Without this hearsay evidence, Thompson contends again that the State's evidence was insufficient for conviction.”
Frederick v. State, 2017 OK CR 12. · cites it 6× “Title 12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2) provides that a statement "relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the startling event or condition" is not excluded by the hearsay rule.”
Bosse v. State, 2017 OK CR 10, 400 P.3d 834. · cites it 2× “¶42 Bosse characterizes these exhibits as "investigative reports by police and other law enforcement personnel," which are inadmissible under 12 O.S.2011, § 2803(8)(a); see , e.g. , Salazar v.”
Wisdom v. State, 918 P.2d 384 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “It is clear that these statements were not admissible nor were they sought to be admitted under any of the firmly established exceptions to the hearsay rule found in 12 O.S.1991, § 2803. Further, they cannot be found to have been admissible under 12 O.”
Muratore v. State ex rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 2014 OK 3, 320 P.3d 1024. · cites it 8× “12 O.S. 2011 § 2803(6). ¶11 Section 2803(6) requires a proper foundation for the admission of documents pursuant to this exception.”
Powell v. State, 2000 OK CR 5, 995 P.2d 510. · cites it 4× “1991, § 2803(3). His state of mind was relevant because Smith testified Douglas was one of three persons in the car from which the shots were fired.”
Davis v. State, 665 P.2d 1186 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983). · cites it 3× “Now see 12 O.S.1981, § 2803(2). Finally, these hearsay statements demonstrate a trustworthiness within the spirit of the specific exceptions.”
Cuesta-Rodriguez v. State, 2010 OK CR 23, 241 P.3d 214. · cites it 2× “2001, § 938(A) require the medical examiner to conduct investigations and prepare autopsy reports under a number of statutorily enumerated circumstances, not just circumstances in which the report might be used in a criminal prosecution.”
Dodd v. State, 2004 OK CR 31, 100 P.3d 1017. · cites it 2× “" See 12 O.S.2001, § 2803(3). The trial court agreed, without first determining exactly what testimony was anticipated.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(1): 6 cases
Powell v. State, 2000 OK CR 5, 995 P.2d 510. “1991, § 2803(3). His state of mind was relevant because Smith testified Douglas was one of three persons in the car from which the shots were fired.”
Miller v. State, 2004 OK CR 29, 98 P.3d 738.
Kiser v. State, 782 P.2d 405 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989).
Reeves v. State, 818 P.2d 495 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991).
Washington v. State, 1999 OK CR 22, 989 P.2d 960.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(18): 3 cases
Majdic v. Cincinnati Mach. Co., 537 A.2d 334 (Pa. 1988).
Durant v. State, 717 P.2d 1161 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(2): 19 cases
Thompson v. State, 2019 OK CR 3, 438 P.3d 373. “12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2). This issue has been preserved for appellate review.”
Johnson v. State, 665 P.2d 815 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983).
Thompson v. State, 438 P.3d 373 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). “was unavailable and Thompson never had an opportunity to cross-examine her. Without this hearsay evidence, Thompson contends again that the State's evidence was insufficient for conviction.”
Frederick v. State, 2017 OK CR 12. “Title 12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2) provides that a statement "relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the startling event or condition" is not excluded by the hearsay rule.”
Pullen v. State, 2016 OK CR 18, 387 P.3d 922.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(21): 1 case
Neilson v. State, 639 P.2d 615 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(22): 7 cases
Lee v. Knight, 771 P.2d 1003 (Okla. 1989).
Willard v. Kelley, 803 P.2d 1124 (Okla. 1990).
Delong v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Dep't of Pub. Saf., 1998 OK CIV APP 32, 956 P.2d 937.
Benham v. Plotner, 795 P.2d 510 (Okla. 1990).
Wade v. State, 624 P.2d 86 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(24): 6 cases
Wisdom v. State, 918 P.2d 384 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “It is clear that these statements were not admissible nor were they sought to be admitted under any of the firmly established exceptions to the hearsay rule found in 12 O.S.1991, § 2803. Further, they cannot be found to have been admissible under 12 O.”
Huskey v. State, 1999 OK CR 3, 989 P.2d 1.
Davis v. State, 665 P.2d 1186 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983). “Now see 12 O.S.1981, § 2803(2). Finally, these hearsay statements demonstrate a trustworthiness within the spirit of the specific exceptions.”
Callison v. Callison, 687 P.2d 106 (Okla. 1984).
Stanberry v. State, 637 P.2d 892 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(3): 24 cases
Tryon v. State, 2018 OK CR 20, 423 P.3d 617. “The first two sentences ("It's okay bc im [sic] going to tell the truth tomorrow.”
Dodd v. State, 2004 OK CR 31, 100 P.3d 1017. “" See 12 O.S.2001, § 2803(3). The trial court agreed, without first determining exactly what testimony was anticipated.”
Hooper v. State, 1997 OK CR 64, 947 P.2d 1090.
Spuehler v. State, 709 P.2d 202 (Okla. Crim. App. 1985).
Kiser v. State, 782 P.2d 405 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(4): 10 cases
Thompson v. State, 2019 OK CR 3, 438 P.3d 373. “12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2). This issue has been preserved for appellate review.”
Thompson v. State, 438 P.3d 373 (Okla. Crim. App. 2019). “was unavailable and Thompson never had an opportunity to cross-examine her. Without this hearsay evidence, Thompson contends again that the State's evidence was insufficient for conviction.”
Frederick v. State, 2017 OK CR 12. “Title 12 O.S.2011, § 2803(2) provides that a statement "relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the startling event or condition" is not excluded by the hearsay rule.”
Frederick v. State, 2017 OK CR 12, 400 P.3d 786.
Moore v. State, 761 P.2d 866 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(5): 3 cases
Steven Keith Hatch v. State of Oklahoma, 58 F.3d 1447 (10th Cir. 1995).
Hatch v. State, 835 P.2d 880 (Okla. Crim. App. 1992).
Stiles v. State, 1999 OK CR 19, 989 P.2d 955.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(6): 22 cases
Cuesta-Rodriguez v. State, 2010 OK CR 23, 241 P.3d 214. “2001, § 938(A) require the medical examiner to conduct investigations and prepare autopsy reports under a number of statutorily enumerated circumstances, not just circumstances in which the report might be used in a criminal prosecution.”
Grant v. State, 2009 OK CR 11, 205 P.3d 1.
Muratore v. State ex rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 2014 OK 3, 320 P.3d 1024. “12 O.S. 2011 § 2803(6). ¶11 Section 2803(6) requires a proper foundation for the admission of documents pursuant to this exception.”
Perry v. State, 893 P.2d 521 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995).
Humphreys v. State, 1997 OK CR 59, 947 P.2d 565.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(8): 10 cases
Charm v. State, 924 P.2d 754 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “Under 12 O.S.1991, § 2803(8), records, reports, statements or data compilations in any form of a public office or agency setting forth its regularly conducted and regularly recorded activities or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law and as to which there was a duty…”
Muratore v. State ex rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 2014 OK 3, 320 P.3d 1024. “12 O.S. 2011 § 2803(6). ¶11 Section 2803(6) requires a proper foundation for the admission of documents pursuant to this exception.”
Salazar v. State, 1998 OK CR 70, 973 P.2d 315.
Hammon v. State, 2000 OK CR 7, 999 P.2d 1082.
Pickens v. State, 850 P.2d 328 (Okla. Crim. App. 1993).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2803(8)(a): 9 cases
Bosse v. State, 2017 OK CR 10, 400 P.3d 834. “¶42 Bosse characterizes these exhibits as "investigative reports by police and other law enforcement personnel," which are inadmissible under 12 O.S.2011, § 2803(8)(a); see , e.g. , Salazar v.”
Charm v. State, 924 P.2d 754 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “Under 12 O.S.1991, § 2803(8), records, reports, statements or data compilations in any form of a public office or agency setting forth its regularly conducted and regularly recorded activities or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law and as to which there was a duty…”
Salazar v. State, 1998 OK CR 70, 973 P.2d 315.
Bosse v. State, 2015 OK CR 14, 360 P.3d 1203.
State v. Nelson, 2015 OK CR 10, 356 P.3d 1113.
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.