Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1 (2026)

Caretakers - Abuse, financial neglect, neglect, sexual

✓ current as of July 2026

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

abuse or exploitation of charge. A. 1. No caretaker or other person shall abuse, commit financial neglect, neglect, commit sexual abuse, or exploit any person entrusted to the care of such caretaker or other person in a nursing facility or other setting, or knowingly cause, secure, or permit any of these acts to be done. 2. For purposes of this section, the terms "abuse", “financial neglect”, "neglect", "sexual abuse", and "exploit" shall have the same meaning as such terms are defined and clarified in Section 10- 103 of Title 43A of the Oklahoma Statutes. B. 1. Any person convicted of a violation of this section, except as provided in paragraph 2 of this subsection, shall be guilty of a Class B1 felony offense. The violator, upon conviction, shall be punished by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for a term not to exceed ten (10) years, and by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in addition, the person shall be subject to the Elderly and Incapacitated Victim’s Protection Act. Such person’s term shall further be subject to the provisions of Section 13.1 of this title for mandatory minimum sentencing. 2. Any person convicted of violating the provisions of this section by committing sexual abuse shall be guilty of a Class A3 felony offense. The person convicted of sexual abuse shall be punished by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for a term not to exceed fifteen (15) years, and by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), or by both such fine and imprisonment, and in addition, the person shall be subject to the Elderly and Incapacitated Victim’s Protection Act. Such person’s imprisonment term imposed pursuant to this section shall further be subject to the provisions of Section 13.1 of this title for mandatory minimum sentencing. C. Consent shall not be a defense for any violation of this section. D. Except for persons sentenced to life or life without parole, any person sentenced to imprisonment for two (2) years or more for a violation of paragraph 2 of subsection B of this section shall be required to serve a term of post-imprisonment supervision pursuant to subparagraph f of paragraph 1 of subsection A of Section 991a of Title 22 of the Oklahoma Statutes under conditions determined by the

Department of Corrections. The jury shall be advised that the mandatory post-imprisonment supervision shall be in addition to the actual imprisonment. Added by Laws 1984, c. 140, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 1984. Amended by Laws 1997, c. 133, § 247, eff. July 1, 1999; Laws 1998, c. 298, § 7, eff. Nov. 1, 1998; Laws 1999, 1st Ex. Sess., c. 5, § 151, eff. July 1, 1999; Laws 2001, c. 428, § 3, emerg. eff. June 5, 2001; Laws 2002, c. 22, § 8, emerg. eff. March 8, 2002; Laws 2007, c. 68, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2007; Laws 2007, c. 261, § 5, eff. Nov. 1, 2007; Laws 2008, c. 314, § 1, eff. July 1, 2008; Laws 2025, c. 486, § 37, eff. Jan. 1, 2026. NOTE: Laws 1998, c. 219, § 1 repealed by Laws 1999, 1st Ex. Sess., c. 5, § 452, eff. July 1, 1999. Laws 2001, c. 194, § 1 repealed by Laws 2002, c. 22, § 34, emerg. eff. March 8, 2002. NOTE: Laws 1998, 1st Ex. Sess., c. 2, § 23 amended the effective date of Laws 1997, c. 133, § 247 from July 1, 1998, to July 1, 1999.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2003–2023 · leading case: Racher v. Westlake Nursing Home Ltd. P'ship, 871 F.3d 1152 (10th Cir. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Racher v. Westlake Nursing Home Ltd. P'ship, 871 F.3d 1152 (10th Cir. 2017). “Gakunga and Kaseke were arrested and charged with caretaker abuse pursuant to Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1 . Aplee. Supp.”

Ofosuhemaa v. Ashcroft, 68 F. App'x 177 (10th Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “The IJ determined that the record was unclear as to whether petitioner’s 1998 conviction was for caretaker abuse or caretaker neglect under Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 843.1. He determined, however, that a conviction for either offense would constitute a crime involving moral…”

Solis v. Rankins (W.D. Okla. 2023). “Petitioner claims that his sentence violates the Eighth Amendment because the term of imprisonment exceeds the statutory maximum penalty provided for his criminal offense under Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1 , and that, when he completed the maximum term of ten years authorized by…”

White v. White (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 2021). “While the Amended Complaint references no statutory provision giving rise to a technical trust, the Response references an Oklahoma criminal statute, Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1 (Caretakers – Abuse, financial neglect, neglect, sexual abuse or exploitation of charge) and Okla.”

Gina M White (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 2021). “While the Amended Complaint references no statutory provision giving rise to a technical trust, the Response references an Oklahoma criminal statute, Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1 (Caretakers – Abuse, financial neglect, neglect, sexual abuse or exploitation of charge) and Okla.”

— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 843.1(A)(1) — 1 case

Ofosuhemaa v. Ashcroft, 68 F. App'x 177 (10th Cir. 2003). “The IJ determined that the record was unclear as to whether petitioner’s 1998 conviction was for caretaker abuse or caretaker neglect under Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 843.1. He determined, however, that a conviction for either offense would constitute a crime involving moral…”

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.