outraging public decency - Injurious acts not expressly forbidden. Every person who willfully and wrongfully commits any act which grossly injures the person or property of another, or which grossly disturbs the public peace or health, or which openly outrages public decency, including but not limited to urination in a public place, and is injurious to public morals, although no punishment is expressly prescribed therefor by this code, is guilty of a misdemeanor. R.L.1910, § 2793. Amended by Laws 2007, c. 358, § 1, eff. July 1, 2007.
Notes of Decisions
Oklahoma Assoc. of Broadcasters, Inc. v. City of Norman, 2016 OK 119 (Okla. 2016).
· cites it 4× “The same day, the Cleveland County District Attorney (District Attorney) filed a criminal information, referencing the same incident number as the probable cause affidavit and alleging that Mixon committed the misdemeanor crime of Acts Resulting in Gross Injury, 21 O.S.2011, §…”
State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Murdock, 2010 OK 32 (Okla. 2010).
· cites it 4× “Murdock was involved in a situation which resulted in his ultimately entering an Alford plea to the misdemeanor charge of Outraging Public Decency, in violation of 21 O.S. § 22. 2 No additional facts were set forth in the complaint.”
State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Layton, 324 P.3d 1244 (Okla. 2014).
· cites it 2× “One count of Sexual Battery was dismissed and attorney entered an Alford plea on the other count, which was reduced to the misdemeanor of Outraging Public Decency, in violation of 21 O.S. § 22. He was sentenced to one year probation, 50 hours of community service, victim…”
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Haave, 290 P.3d 747 (Okla. 2012).
“One count of Sexual Battery was dismissed and attorney entered an Alford plea on the other count, which was reduced to the misdemeanor of Outraging Public Decency, in violation of 21 O.S. § 22. He was sentenced to one *753 year probation, 50 hours of community service, victim…”
State v. Walker, 568 P.2d 286 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977).
· cites it 4× “Thelma Jane Walker, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was charged under 21 O.S.1971, § 22, with wilfully and wrongfully committing an act injurious to public morals and openly outraging public decency by “exposing her breasts and pubic area and placing her vagina in close…”
Nuncio v. Rock Knoll Townhome Vill., Inc., 389 P.3d 370 (Okla. Civ. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “fully and wrongfully commits any act which grossly injures the person or property of another, or which grossly disturbs the public peace or health, or which openly outrages public decency, including but not limited to urination in a public place, and is injurious to public…”
Vanscoy v. State, 734 P.2d 825 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “The appellant argues that outraging public decency, 21 O.S.1981, § 22, is the lesser included offense of indecent exposure.”
Canfield v. State, 506 P.2d 987 (Okla. Crim. App. 1973).
“Therefore, if defendant is to be punished in this case, I believe that punishment should be accomplished under the provisions of 21 O.S.1971, § 22, “Outraging Public Decency.”
State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Zannotti, 326 P.3d 496 (Okla. 2014).
“3d 107 (entered Alford plea to the misdemeanor charge of Outraging Public Decency, in violation of 21 O.S.2001 § 22; did not involve a client or former client); State ex rel.”
Ridgeway v. State, 553 P.2d 511 (Okla. Crim. App. 1976).
“Defendant also contends that the State failed to prove that the performance openly outraged public decency as required by 21 O.S.1971, § 22, and as charged in the information.”
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Reynolds, 289 P.3d 1283 (Okla. 2012).
“One count of Sexual Battery was dismissed and attorney entered an Alford plea on the other count, which was reduced to the misdemeanor of Outraging Public Decency, in violation of 21 O.S. § 22. He was sentenced to one year probation, 50 hours of community service, victim…”
Swann v. State, 637 P.2d 888 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981).
“The statute, 21 O.S.1971 § 22, provides that “[ejvery person who wilfully and wrongfully commits any act .”
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.