Oklahoma Statutes
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 61 (2026)
Repealed by Laws 1979, c. 135, § 7, emerg. eff. May 3,
✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
OK-LEGoklegislature.gov
JustiaOkla. Stat.
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
1979.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1949–1985 · leading case: Wooten v. State, 702 P.2d 59 (Okla. Crim. App. 1985).
Wooten v. State, 702 P.2d 59 (Okla. Crim. App. 1985). “-1, enacted in 1979 to replace 21 O.S.1971, § 61, now permits the concurrent sentencing he requests.”
Stevens v. State, 274 P.2d 402 (Okla. Crim. App. 1954). “” He then entered the above judgment. The court did not attempt to suspend the sentencé in case No.”
Bishop v. State, 593 P.2d 505 (Okla. Crim. App. 1979). “We disagree. The original order was indeed invalid, not because Judge Swank lacked the authority to hear the case, but because he lacked the authority to provide for concurrent sentences.”
Bearden v. State, 392 P.2d 55 (Okla. Crim. App. 1964). “21 O.S.1961 § 61: “When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of the first term of…”
Thurman v. Anderson, 500 P.2d 1074 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972). “Petitioner contends that this procedure is unlawful, claiming he should have completed the unexpired portion of the prior sentence before he began the subsequent sentence; and that once the first three (3) year sentence began, it automatically expired three (3) years thereafter,…”
Marsh v. Page, 450 P.2d 846 (Okla. Crim. App. 1969). “21 O.S.1961, § 61 provides as follows: “When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of the…”
Shetsky v. Raines, 344 P.2d 1069 (Okla. Crim. App. 1959). “By 21 O.S.1951 § 61, it is provided: ‘When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before' sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of the…”
Owens v. Osage Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 531 P.2d 1063 (Okla. Crim. App. 1975). “Title 21 O.S.1971, § 61 states as follows: “When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of…”
Application of Richardson, 346 P.2d 954 (Okla. Crim. App. 1959). “*957 21 O.S.1951 § 61 provides: “When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of the first…”
Ex parte Edwards, 204 P.2d 547 (Okla. Crim. App. 1949). ““21 O.S. 1941 § 61 provides: “ ‘When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of the first…”
Fox v. State, 501 P.2d 834 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972). “In some instances the prisoner does not begin to serve the unexpired term of his first sentence until the date of formal revocation of his parole.”
In re Habeas Corpus of Snow, 478 P.2d 959 (Okla. Crim. App. 1970). “21 O.S.1961, § 61 provides the following: “When any person is convicted of two or more crimes before sentence has been pronounced upon him for either, the imprisonment to which he is sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction, must commence at the termination of…”
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.