Children – Intellectual disability - Ignorance - Commission without consciousness - Involuntary subjection. All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: 1. Children under the age of seven (7) years; 2. Children over the age of seven (7) years, but under the age of fourteen (14) years, in the absence of proof that at the time of committing the act or neglect charged against them, they knew its wrongfulness; 3. Persons who are impaired by reason of an intellectual disability upon proof that at the time of committing the act charged against them they were incapable of knowing its wrongfulness; 4. Mentally ill persons, and all persons of unsound mind, including persons temporarily or partially deprived of reason, upon proof that at the time of committing the act charged against them they were incapable of knowing its wrongfulness; 5. Persons who committed the act, or made the omission charged, under an ignorance or mistake of fact which disproves any criminal intent. But ignorance of the law does not excuse from punishment for its violation; 6. Persons who committed the act charged without being conscious thereof; and 7. Persons who committed the act, or make the omission charged, while under involuntary subjection to the power of superiors. R.L. 1910, § 2094. Amended by Laws 1998, c. 246, § 11, eff. Nov. 1, 1998; Laws 2019, c. 475, § 16, eff. Nov. 1, 2019.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
56
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1955–2022 · leading case:
Diestel v. Hines, 506 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2007).
Diestel v. Hines, 506 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Under Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152 (4), people are not capable of committing crimes if they are "temporarily or partially deprived of reason, upon proof that at the time of committing the act charged against them they were incapable of knowing its wrongfulness.”
Schaffer v. Green, 496 P.2d 375 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972).
· cites it 12× “Brown, for in 1910, the Legislature originally enacted 21 O.S. § 152 which has never been expressly repealed, nor could it be repealed by inference, by the enactment of unconstitutionally invalid subsequent legislation.”
Ullery v. State, 1999 OK CR 36, 988 P.2d 332.
· cites it 4× “[52] 21 O.S.1991, § 152. [53] Cheney v. State, 1995 OK CR 72 , 909 P.”
Runnels v. State, 2018 OK CR 27, 426 P.3d 614.
· cites it 2× “See 21 O.S.2011, § 152 (5) (setting forth the defense of mistake of fact disproving criminal intent).”
Spunaugle v. State, 1997 OK CR 47, 946 P.2d 246.
· cites it 4× “Title 21 O.S.1991, § 152(7), the first of three defining statutes, provides a person who commits a crime under duress is deemed incapable of committing the crime: All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: .”
Carter v. State, 376 P.2d 351 (Okla. Crim. App. 1962).
· cites it 5× “Adams together with his conclusions is made most apparent in light of the provisions of 21 O.S.1951 § 152, reading in part as follows: “All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: * * * “6.”
Smith v. State, 932 P.2d 521 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “Appellant directs this Court's attention to 21 O.S.1991, § 152(6) which exempts from culpability "[p]ersons who committed the act charged without being conscious thereof.”
Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Todd, 813 P.2d 508 (Okla. 1991).
· cites it 2× “The terms of 21 O.S.1981 § 152 provide in pertinent part: “All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: 1.”
Murphy v. State, 2002 OK CR 32, 54 P.3d 556.
“" 21 O.S.2001, § 152. And yet, while mentally retarded individuals are capable of committing crimes in Oklahoma, in light of Atkins, those who fit within its holding are no longer eligible for the death penalty.”
Freshour v. Turner, 496 P.2d 389 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972).
· cites it 5× “2d 829 , it was unnecessary to revert to the common law, since there existed valid and unrepealed legislation determining the age of criminal responsibility 21 O.S. § 152. The "void" referred to in Schaffer v.”
State v. Herrera, 1999 UT 64, 993 P.2d 854.
· cites it 2× “01(A)(14) (Anderson 1996); Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 152 (West 1983); 18 Pa.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(1): 3 cases
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(3): 1 case
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(4): 8 cases
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(5): 1 case
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(6): 5 cases
Smith v. State, 932 P.2d 521 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996).
“Appellant directs this Court's attention to 21 O.S.1991, § 152(6) which exempts from culpability "[p]ersons who committed the act charged without being conscious thereof.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 152(7): 6 cases
Spunaugle v. State, 1997 OK CR 47, 946 P.2d 246.
“Title 21 O.S.1991, § 152(7), the first of three defining statutes, provides a person who commits a crime under duress is deemed incapable of committing the crime: All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: .”
Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Todd, 813 P.2d 508 (Okla. 1991).
“The terms of 21 O.S.1981 § 152 provide in pertinent part: “All persons are capable of committing crimes, except those belonging to the following classes: 1.”
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.