Okla. Stat. » Title 21 — CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 751 (2026)

Maiming defined

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every person who, with premeditated design to injure another, inflicts upon his person any injury which disfigures his personal appearance or disables any member or organ of his body or seriously diminishes his physical vigor, is guilty of maiming, a Class A3 felony offense. R.L.1910, § 2345. Amended by Laws 2025, c. 486, § 36, eff. Jan. 1, 2026.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Hogner v. State, 2021 OK CR 4 (Okla. Crim. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hogner v. State, 2021 OK CR 4 (Okla. Crim. App. 2021). “2014, § 644) (Count IX), all felonies were After Former Conviction of Two or More Felonies, in the District Court of Craig County, Case No.”
Post v. State, 715 P.2d 1105 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “21 O.S.1981, § 751. We have accordingly held that a disfiguring injury caused by another does not constitute Maiming unless done “with premeditated design to injure another,” which requires a specific intent to inflict an injury, although not necessarily the very disfigurement…”
Fairchild v. State, 1998 OK CR 47 (Okla. Crim. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “1996, § 7115, sets forth the following acts: willfully or maliciously engaging in child abuse or neglect, willful or malicious injury, torture, maiming, or the use of unreasonable force on a child under the age of eighteen. Plain language, statutory definition, and judicial…”
State v. Bates, 628 P.2d 383 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981). · cites it 4× “BUSSEY, Judge: From a ruling of the District Court of Oklahoma County holding unconstitutional a portion of 21 O.S.1971, § 751 the State of Oklahoma has perfected an appeal upon a reserved question of law pursuant to 22 O.”
United States v. Galbreath (10th Cir. 2018). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 751 . Similar to the third-degree assault statute at issue in Perez-Vargas, Oklahoma’s maiming statute focuses on the result of a criminal defendant’s conduct, not the means.”
Montgomery v. Cotton (10th Cir. 2026). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 751 . Applying Jackson, the OCCA determined the prosecution provided sufficient evidence at trial for the jury to convict Montgomery of maiming.”
Wright v. Champion (10th Cir. 1999). “” Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 751 . - 10 - We agree with the magistrate that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, supports petitioner’s maiming conviction.”
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.