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

Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 749 (2026)

Sworn statements taken by district attorney or peace

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

officer of persons having knowledge of criminal offense - Use. A. In the investigation of a criminal offense, the district attorney or any peace officer may take the sworn statement of any person having knowledge of such criminal offense. Any person charged with a crime shall be entitled to a copy of any such sworn statement upon the same being obtained. B. If a witness in a criminal proceeding gives testimony upon a material issue of the case contradictory to his previous sworn statement, evidence may be introduced that such witness has previously made a statement under oath contradictory to such testimony. Laws 1969, c. 224, § 1, emerg. eff. April 21, 1969.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1971–1995 · leading case: Omalza v. State, 911 P.2d 286 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Omalza v. State, 911 P.2d 286 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “The taking of this sworn statement was specifically authorized by 22 O.S.1981, § 749 and therefore satisfies an element of the offense of perjury pursuant to 21 O.”
McDonald v. State, 553 P.2d 171 (Okla. Crim. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “all statements, recordings, reports, correspondence, and information now in the possession or under the control of the State which contain statements which support or. tend to support the theories of defense of this accused of which exculpate or tend to exculpate this accused…”
Duvall v. State, 825 P.2d 621 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). “The principal statutes governing criminal discovery by the defendant in Oklahoma are 22 O.”
Bowman v. State, 585 P.2d 1373 (Okla. Crim. App. 1978). “Finally, while it is true that as an investigative tool the District Attorney or any peace officer has the authority under 22 O.S.1971, § 749, to take the sworn statement of any person having knowledge of a criminal offense, this is offset by the right of the defendant to have a…”
Castleberry v. Crisp, 414 F. Supp. 945 (N.D. Okla. 1976). “While this Court recognizes that 22 O.S.1971 § 749 does not provide for discovery of statements unless they are sworn statements, and further that the court in State v.”
Hickerson v. State, 565 P.2d 684 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “2d 171 (1976), wherein we stated: “Also relevant to the issue of criminal discovery is 22 O.S.1971, § 749, which does not permit discovery of statements alone unless they are sworn statements and State ex rel.”
Stevenson v. State, 486 P.2d 646 (Okla. Crim. App. 1971). “Furthermore, 22 O.S.Supp.1970, § 749, enacted in 1969, expressly allows a defendant to a copy of the “statement of any person having knowledge of such criminal offense” made to any peace officer or prosecutor.”
Bettlyoun v. State, 562 P.2d 862 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “A search of the statutory rules relating to pre-trial discovery in a criminal prosecution in the State of Oklahoma reveals that under the provisions of 22 O.S., § 749, an accused is permitted a copy of any sworn statement of any person,.”
Hall v. State, 751 P.2d 1091 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “22 O.S.1981, § 749. Other discovery rules have been developed through case law.”
Durant v. State, 717 P.2d 1161 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986). “A criminal defendant is entitled to the sworn statements of witnesses made to the prosecution, 22 O.S.1981, § 749(A), but is not entitled to other pretrial statements except to the extent they fall within the purview of Brady, supra.”
State ex rel. Fallis v. Truesdell, 493 P.2d 1134 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972). · cites it 2× “" (Emphasis added) Following the above cited decisions, the Legislature expressed its opinion by providing the defendant with a statutory right to any sworn statements with the enactment of 22 O.S., § 749, in 1969: "[A] In the investigation of a criminal offense, the district…”
Rush v. Blasdel, 804 P.2d 1140 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). “Furthermore, Petitioner relies erroneously upon 22 O.S.1981, § 749(A). The Legislature has addressed the disclosure of testimony before a grand jury.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 749(A): 2 cases
Durant v. State, 717 P.2d 1161 (Okla. Crim. App. 1986). “A criminal defendant is entitled to the sworn statements of witnesses made to the prosecution, 22 O.S.1981, § 749(A), but is not entitled to other pretrial statements except to the extent they fall within the purview of Brady, supra.”
Rush v. Blasdel, 804 P.2d 1140 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). “Furthermore, Petitioner relies erroneously upon 22 O.S.1981, § 749(A). The Legislature has addressed the disclosure of testimony before a grand jury.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 749(B): 1 case
Omalza v. State, 911 P.2d 286 (Okla. Crim. App. 1995). “The taking of this sworn statement was specifically authorized by 22 O.S.1981, § 749 and therefore satisfies an element of the offense of perjury pursuant to 21 O.”
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.