Okla. Stat. » Title 22 — CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18 (2026)

See the following versions:

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

OS 22-18v1 (SB 2038, Laws 2024, c. 452, § 12). OS 22-18v2 (SB 1770, Laws 2024, c. 259, § 1).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Howrey v. State, 2002 OK CR 22 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Howrey v. State, 2002 OK CR 22 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002). · cites it 22× “CF-1993-340 and CM-1993-1102, *1283 pursuant to 22 O.S.Supp.1997, § 18 and 22 O.S.Supp.1999, § 19 (hereafter 22 O.”
Gibson v. Klinger, 232 F.3d 799 (10th Cir. 2000). · cites it 4× “Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18 app. rule 5.2(C)(2).”
In Re Spilman, 2010 OK 70 (Okla. 2010). · cites it 12× “[15] The first question presented for our review is whether 22 O.S.Supp. §§ 18, 19 apply to Supreme Court Bar disciplinary proceedings.”
D. a. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, 2018 OK 102 (Okla. 2018). · cites it 22× “Title 22 O.S.2011 §18 was amended in 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, and again in 2018.”
State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Mothershed, 2011 OK 84 (Okla. 2011). · cites it 2× “Respondent states that 22 O.S. §§ 18, 19, federal law, and the Court's inherent authority provide sufficient authority for expunging his records.”
Brassfield v. State, 2024 OK 9 (Okla. 2024). · cites it 3× “3d 591, 594 ("There is a prima facie showing of harm when a circumstance enumerated in 22 O.S. § 18 is shown to exist."). 6 Section 19(F) states: Upon a finding that the harm to privacy of the person in interest or dangers of unwarranted adverse consequences outweigh the public…”
Olson v. State, 286 P.3d 296 (Okla. Civ. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “OSBI contended that 22 O.S.Supp.2009 § 18 limits ex-pungement to persons who have not been convicted of other crimes.”
Buechler v. State, 2008 OK CIV APP 1 (Okla. Civ. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “4 In an order dated June 21, 2006, the trial court found Buechler was authorized to move for expungement under 22 O.S. § 18. It found Buechler qualifies for expungement of Count II under 22 O.”
State v. McMahon, 1998 OK CIV APP 103 (Okla. Civ. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “” Expungement is authorized in such circumstances by 22 O.S.1991 §§ 18 and 19. A hearing was set and notice was given to the district attorney of Tulsa County, the Tulsa Police Department (the arresting agency), and the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.”
S.K.W. v. State, 2022 OK 39 (Okla. 2022). · cites it 6× “The 2001 version, 22 O.S. 2001 §18 Persons authorized to file a motion for expungement, as provided herein, must be within one of the following categories: 1.”
A.R.A. v. Commonwealth, 809 S.E.2d 660 (Va. 2018). “Laws 183 , § 2 (codified as amended at Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18 (5) (2012) ); Commonwealth v.”
In Re De-Annexation of Certain Real Prop. From City of Seminole, 2009 OK 18 (Okla. 2009). “Brewer's criminal record pursuant to Title 22 O.S. § 18 within a reasonable period of time.”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(1) — 1 case
Howrey v. State, 2002 OK CR 22 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002). “CF-1993-340 and CM-1993-1102, *1283 pursuant to 22 O.S.Supp.1997, § 18 and 22 O.S.Supp.1999, § 19 (hereafter 22 O.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(2) — 1 case
Waters v. State, 2020 OK CIV APP 43 (Okla. Civ. App. 2020).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(3) — 1 case
Howrey v. State, 2002 OK CR 22 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002). “CF-1993-340 and CM-1993-1102, *1283 pursuant to 22 O.S.Supp.1997, § 18 and 22 O.S.Supp.1999, § 19 (hereafter 22 O.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(4) — 1 case
Buechler v. State, 2008 OK CIV APP 1 (Okla. Civ. App. 2007). “4 In an order dated June 21, 2006, the trial court found Buechler was authorized to move for expungement under 22 O.S. § 18. It found Buechler qualifies for expungement of Count II under 22 O.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(5) — 1 case
Points v. State, 2014 OK CIV APP 27 (Okla. Civ. App. 2014).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(7) — 1 case
Buechler v. State, 2008 OK CIV APP 1 (Okla. Civ. App. 2007). “4 In an order dated June 21, 2006, the trial court found Buechler was authorized to move for expungement under 22 O.S. § 18. It found Buechler qualifies for expungement of Count II under 22 O.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(8) — 2 cases
In Re Spilman, 2010 OK 70 (Okla. 2010). “[15] The first question presented for our review is whether 22 O.S.Supp. §§ 18, 19 apply to Supreme Court Bar disciplinary proceedings.”
Olson v. State, 286 P.3d 296 (Okla. Civ. App. 2012). “OSBI contended that 22 O.S.Supp.2009 § 18 limits ex-pungement to persons who have not been convicted of other crimes.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(9) — 1 case
Olson v. State, 286 P.3d 296 (Okla. Civ. App. 2012). “OSBI contended that 22 O.S.Supp.2009 § 18 limits ex-pungement to persons who have not been convicted of other crimes.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A) — 1 case
D. a. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, 2018 OK 102 (Okla. 2018). “Title 22 O.S.2011 §18 was amended in 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, and again in 2018.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A)(1) — 1 case
Question Submitted by: Kimberly Glazier, Exec. Dir., Oklahoma Bd. of Nursing, 2017 OK AG 12 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2017).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A)(14) — 1 case
D. a. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, 2018 OK 102 (Okla. 2018). “Title 22 O.S.2011 §18 was amended in 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, and again in 2018.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A)(7) — 1 case
D. a. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, 2018 OK 102 (Okla. 2018). “Title 22 O.S.2011 §18 was amended in 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, and again in 2018.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A)(8) — 2 cases
Mann v. State, 2022 OK CIV APP 6 (Okla. Civ. App. 2022).
Plumley v. State, 2017 OK CIV APP 26 (Okla. Civ. App. 2017).
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(A)(9) — 1 case
D. a. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, 2018 OK 102 (Okla. 2018). “Title 22 O.S.2011 §18 was amended in 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, and again in 2018.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 18(B) — 1 case
Question Submitted by: Kimberly Glazier, Exec. Dir., Oklahoma Bd. of Nursing, 2017 OK AG 12 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2017).
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.