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

Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 402 (2026)

Indictment or information must be certain and direct

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The indictment or information must be direct and certain as it regards: 1. The party charged. 2. The offense charged. 3. The particular circumstances of the offense charged, when they are necessary to constitute a complete offense. R.L.1910, § 5739.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1973–1996 · leading case: Parker v. State, 917 P.2d 980 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Parker v. State, 917 P.2d 980 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “22 O.S.1991, § 402 requires an Information to contain a statement of the acts constituting the offense.”
Doyle v. State, 785 P.2d 317 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989). “Title 22 O.S.1981, § 402 provides that the information must be direct and certain as it regards the party charged; the offense charged; and the particular circumstances of the offense charged, when they are necessary to constitute a complete offense.”
City of Tulsa v. Haley, 554 P.2d 102 (Okla. Crim. App. 1976). “” And, under 22 O.S.1971, § 402, it is provided : “The indictment or information must be direct and certain as it regards: “1.”
Hunter v. State, 637 P.2d 871 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981). “” and Title 22 O.S.1971, § 402, requires the information to be “direct and certain” concerning the “particular circumstances of the offense charged, when they are necessary to constitute a complete offense.”
Thompson v. State, 507 P.2d 1271 (Okla. Crim. App. 1973). “1971 , § 401 and 22 O.S.1971, § 402, which set forth the requisites of a sufficient Information.”
Swann v. State, 637 P.2d 888 (Okla. Crim. App. 1981). “” 22 O.S.1971 § 402. In City of Tulsa v. Haley, 554 P.”
Poplin v. State, 761 P.2d 905 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “[a] statement of the acts constituting the offense, in ordinary and concise language, and in such manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended.” 22 O.”
Tiger v. State, 900 P.2d 406 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995). “22 O.S.1991, § 402. The words used in an indictment or information must be construed in their usual acceptation, in common language, except words and phrases defined by law, which are to be construed according to their legal meaning.”
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.