Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1541.4 (2026)

False or bogus check or checks defined; prima facie

✓ current as of July 2026

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

evidence of intent to defraud and knowledge of insufficient funds or credit; effect of refusal by drawee of check offered for purchase of goods or livestock. A. The term "false or bogus check or checks" shall include checks or orders, including those converted to electronic fund transfer, which are not honored on account of insufficient funds of the maker to pay same or because the check or order was drawn on a

closed account or on a nonexistent account when such checks or orders are given: 1. In exchange for money or property; 2. In exchange for any benefit or thing of value; 3. As a down payment for the purchase of any item of which the purchaser is taking immediate possession, as against the maker or drawer thereof; or 4. As payment made to a landlord under a lease or rental agreement. B. The making, drawing, uttering, or delivering of a check, draft, or order, payment of which is refused by the drawee, shall be prima facie evidence of intent to defraud and the knowledge of insufficient funds in, or credit with, such bank or other depository; provided, such maker or drawer shall not have paid the drawee thereof the amount due thereon, together with the protest fees, within five (5) days from the date the same is presented for payment; and provided, further, that the check or order is presented for payment within thirty (30) days after same is delivered and accepted. C. A check offered for the purchase of goods or livestock that is refused by a drawee shall not be considered to be an extension of credit by the seller of goods or livestock to the maker or drawer of the check. D. A check or order offered to a merchant in payment on an open account of the maker with the merchant shall mean "a check or order given in exchange for a benefit or thing of value", notwithstanding that the merchant may debit the account of the maker or impose other charges pursuant to applicable law in the event the check or order is not honored. Added by Laws 1967, c. 94, § 4, emerg. eff. April 20, 1967. Amended by Laws 1975, c. 124, § 1, emerg. eff. May 13, 1975; Laws 2002, c. 116, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2002; Laws 2009, c. 428, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2009; Laws 2013, c. 127, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2013; Laws 2014, c. 224, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2014.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1977–1988 · leading case: Dunaway v. State, 561 P.2d 103 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dunaway v. State, 561 P.2d 103 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). · cites it 4× “Apparently, defendant is referring to 21 O.S.Supp. 1975, § 1541.4, which states, in part: “The term ‘false or bogus check or checks’ shall include checks or orders which are not honored on account of insufficient funds of the maker to pay same, .”

Hunter v. State, 740 P.2d 1206 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987). “is presented for payment for thirth [sic] (30) days after same is delivered and accepted, (emphasis added) This instruction is identical to the statutory language of 21 O.S.1981, § 1541.4, which defines the offense involved here.”

Smith v. State, 590 P.2d 687 (Okla. Crim. App. 1979). “3 and 21 O.S.Supp.1977, § 1541.4. The case was tried to a jury and a guilty verdict was returned.”

Gore v. State, 735 P.2d 576 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987). “See 21 O.S.1981, § 1541.4. Moreover, appellant has never made any attempt to make restitution nor have the cattle been returned.”

Ross v. State, 572 P.2d 1001 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “In considering the defendant’s first assignment of error, the trial court’s failure to grant the demurrer to the evidence, we must consider the sufficiency of evidence involving a bogus check charge in light of 21 O.S.1971, § 1541.4. The State can establish prima facie evidence…”

Boyette v. State, 764 P.2d 1365 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “See 21 O.S.1981, § 1541.4. See also Whitten v.”

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.