Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 19, § 215.30 (2026)

Salaries and expenses

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Beginning January 1, 1997, each district attorney shall receive a salary of Seventy-one Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-three Dollars ($71,663.00) per year, payable monthly. Beginning January 1, 1999, each district attorney shall receive a salary of Eighty- five Thousand Dollars ($85,000.00) per year, payable monthly. Beginning July 1, 2003, each district attorney shall receive a salary equal to ninety-eight percent (98%) of the salary of a district judge. Any increase in salary in fiscal year 2015 must be paid from existing available funds. B. All appointees and employees of district attorneys, except special district attorneys appointed pursuant to subsection C of Section 215.37M of this title, shall be deemed to be state officers or employees for all purposes. All special district attorneys appointed pursuant to subsection C of Section 215.37M of this title shall be deemed to be state officers only for purposes of The Governmental Tort Claims Act and Rule 1.11 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys licensed to practice law in this state. C. Population, for the purposes of Section 215.1 et seq. of this title, shall be as determined by the last Federal Decennial Census. The salaries of the district attorneys and the salaries of the assistant district attorneys and their operating and maintenance expenses in each county shall be paid by the state. Provided however: 1. In counties having a population of four hundred thousand (400,000) or more, the salary of the district attorney and assistant district attorneys may be supplemented by the county. Such supplement for the district attorney shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the salary provided for district attorneys by this section. Such supplement for the assistant district attorneys shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the salary authorized for assistant district attorneys in Section 215.34 of this title. 2. The salaries and operating expenses of those assistant district attorneys who are assigned to child support enforcement duties shall be paid by funds received as reimbursement from the Department of Human Services under terms of a contract with the office of the district attorney as authorized by Section 237.1 of Title 56 of the Oklahoma Statutes. D. The District Attorneys Council, which may hereinafter be referred to as the "Council", is hereby designated as the state agency for the administration and disbursement of all salaries and expenses of the offices of district attorneys authorized by law.

All such payrolls and claims against State Treasury funds must be approved by the Council prior to submission to the Office of Management and Enterprise Services for payment. The Council and the Director of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services shall promulgate reasonable rules and regulations covering the preparation of estimates of needs, budgets and claims for the administration of this act, Section 215.1 et seq. of this title, the transmittal of county funds to the State Treasury and the disbursement of all state and county funds under this act. Added by Laws 1982, c. 340, § 11, emerg. eff. June 2, 1982. Amended by Laws 1985, c. 306, § 1, emerg. eff. July 24, 1985; Laws 1988, c. 109, § 6, eff. Nov. 1, 1988; Laws 1990, c. 264, § 28, operative July 1, 1990; Laws 1991, c. 58, § 1, emerg. eff. April 10, 1991; Laws 1994, c. 239, § 2; Laws 1996, c. 24, § 3, emerg. eff. April 3, 1996; Laws 1997, c. 384, § 9, eff. Jan. 1, 1999; Laws 2000, c. 261, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2000; Laws 2002, c. 389, § 1, emerg. eff. June 4, 2002; Laws 2008, c. 334, § 3, eff. Nov. 1, 2008; Laws 2012, c. 304, § 68; Laws 2014, H.J.R. No. 1096, § 2, eff. July 1, 2014.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1988–1999 · leading case: State v. Lynch, 796 P.2d 1150 (Okla. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Lynch, 796 P.2d 1150 (Okla. 1990). · cites it 2× “Under 19 O.S.Supp. 1988 § 215.30(B)(2) all district attorneys receive the same amount.”

State ex rel. Macy v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 986 P.2d 1130 (Okla. 1999). · cites it 4× “r 1996-1997 salary supplement and included that sum in the budget adopted for that year; (2) the commissioners refused to approve payment of those sums accruing since 31 December 1996; (3) the county has the option to supplement from county funds the state salaries of the DA and…”

State Ex Rel. MacY v. BD. OF COM'RS, 1999 OK 53 (Okla. 1999). · cites it 5× “through the June 24, 1996 resolution disapproving a salary supplement for the district attorney (and his assistants) or (b) through the January 21, 1997 resolution that confined claims for the budgeted salary supplement to only the first half of the fiscal year? and [2] Is a…”

Tulsa Cnty. v. Braswell, 766 P.2d 341 (Okla. 1988). “19 O.S.Supp.1982 § 215.30. The theory of Blankenship still holds true, however, for this respondent in that her primary purpose is to serve the citizens of Tulsa county and the beneficiary of her work is the county, not the state.”

— Okla. Stat. tit. 19, § 215.30(B)(2) — 1 case

State v. Lynch, 796 P.2d 1150 (Okla. 1990). “Under 19 O.S.Supp. 1988 § 215.30(B)(2) all district attorneys receive the same amount.”

— Okla. Stat. tit. 19, § 215.30(C)(1) — 2 cases

State ex rel. Macy v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 986 P.2d 1130 (Okla. 1999). “r 1996-1997 salary supplement and included that sum in the budget adopted for that year; (2) the commissioners refused to approve payment of those sums accruing since 31 December 1996; (3) the county has the option to supplement from county funds the state salaries of the DA and…”

State Ex Rel. MacY v. BD. OF COM'RS, 1999 OK 53 (Okla. 1999). “through the June 24, 1996 resolution disapproving a salary supplement for the district attorney (and his assistants) or (b) through the January 21, 1997 resolution that confined claims for the budgeted salary supplement to only the first half of the fiscal year? and [2] Is a…”

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.