Oklahoma Statutes
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 792 (2026)
Force or fear - How employed
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
OK-LEGoklegislature.gov
JustiaOkla. Stat.
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
To constitute robbery, the force or fear must be employed either to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking. R.L.1910, § 2365. Amended by Laws 2025, c. 329, § 3, eff. Nov. 1, 2025.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1955–2020 · leading case: United States v. Garcia-Caraveo, 586 F.3d 1230 (10th Cir. 2009).
United States v. Garcia-Caraveo, 586 F.3d 1230 (10th Cir. 2009). “17-A, § 651; Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 792 ; S.D. Codified Laws § 22-30-2 ; Wis.”
Kelsey v. State, 569 P.2d 1028 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “CRF-76-78, for the offense of Robbery By Force, After Former Conviction of a Felony, in violation of 21 O.S.1971, § 792. His punishment was fixed at twenty (20) years’ imprisonment and from said judgment and sentence a timely appeal has been perfected to this Court.”
Rounds v. State, 679 P.2d 283 (Okla. Crim. App. 1984). “See, 21 O.S.1981, § 792. At the time Mr. Calvert parted with his property, he was acting under the fear generated by the shotgun; he was not even aware of King’s knife until after he exited the car.”
Duckett v. State, 711 P.2d 944 (Okla. Crim. App. 1985). “OPINION BRETT, Judge: Appellant, Robert Don Duckett, was tried by a jury for the crime of Robbery by Force in violation of 21 O.S.1981, § 792 in Case No. CRF-83-38 in the District Court of LeFlore County.”
Snake v. State, 453 P.2d 287 (Okla. Crim. App. 1969). “Title 21 O.S. § 792 provides: “To constitute robbery, the force or fear must be employed either to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking.”
Smith v. State, 519 P.2d 1370 (Okla. Crim. App. 1974). “In support of this proposition, the defendant cites 21 O.S.1971, § 792 and § 796 which state: “To constitute robbery, the force or fear must be employed either to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking.”
Ingram v. State, 755 P.2d 120 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “OPINION PARKS, Judge: Owen Ingram, appellant, was tried by jury and convicted of Robbery by Fear (21 O.S.1981, § 792), After Former Conviction of Two or More Felonies (21 O.”
Allen v. Raines, 360 P.2d 949 (Okla. Crim. App. 1961). “We cannot agree with the contention of petitioner that he should have been charged with but one crime, that of escape or jail-break. He admits striking the two jailers with an iron pipe or bar, rendering both unconscious, and to taking the pistol to aid in his escape.”
Application of Massie, 283 P.2d 573 (Okla. Crim. App. 1955). “” It is then contended that the statute, 21 O.S.1951 § 792, provides that if the force was employed as a means of escape that the charge based thereon could not be robbery.”
Woods v. State, 569 P.2d 1004 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “” Title 21 O.S.1971, § 792, states the manner in which the force or fear must be employed: “To constitute robbery, the force or fear must be employed either to obtain or retain possession of the property, or to prevent or overcome resistance to the taking.”
Guarino v. State, 491 P.2d 326 (Okla. Crim. App. 1971). “21 O.S.1941 § 792, above quoted. It is not necessary that both force and fear be *329 employed.”
Haley v. Allbaugh (10th Cir. 2017). “In his plea, Haley acknowledged his conviction carried a potential sentence of twenty-years to life and agreed to a sentence of twenty-five years’ imprisonment.”
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.