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

Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 812 (2026)

Repealed by Laws 1999, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 6, § 3, eff. Nov

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

1, 1999.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases, 1946–2020 · leading case: In Re the Habeas Corpus of Gregory, 309 P.2d 1083 (Okla. Crim. App. 1957).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Habeas Corpus of Gregory, 309 P.2d 1083 (Okla. Crim. App. 1957). · cites it 4× “Later, on the 28th of February, 1957, petitioner, through new counsel, attempted to present motions to dismiss the said actions as provided in 22 O.S.1951 § 812, whereupon the trial judge ordered said motions to be stricken and expunged from the record, indicating, however, the…”
Ellis v. State, 2003 OK CR 18, 76 P.3d 1131. “¶ 24 In proposition one, Appellant claims his right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution [5] and Article II, §§ 6 and 20 of Oklahoma's Constitution [6] was violated. He further claims he was denied the statutory expression of that right…”
Walters v. State, 455 P.2d 702 (Okla. Crim. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “He asserts that the dismissal is required under the provisions of Article II, Section 20 of the Oklahoma Constitution, the pertinent part of which is as follows: “In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of…”
State Ex Rel. Trusty v. Graham, 525 P.2d 1231 (Okla. Crim. App. 1974). · cites it 2× “s entitled to have received a speedy trial in accordance with this Court’s decision which reversed and remanded his conviction for a new trial; and insofar as some fifteen (15) months have passed between the time his conviction was reversed and remanded and the filing of the…”
Davidson v. State, 171 P.2d 640 (Okla. Crim. App. 1946). · cites it 2× ““Under the provisions of 22 O.S.1941 § 812, the accused in a criminal prosecution applying for dismissal for unnecessary delay, who is incarcerated, need only show expiration of statutory time and lack of postponement on his application or with his consent.”
Blake v. State, 375 P.2d 270 (Okla. Crim. App. 1962). · cites it 2× “Defendant cites the Constitution of the United States, the Oklahoma Constitution and Title 22 O.S.1951 § 812, and the case of In re Gregory, Okl.”
Simpson v. State, 642 P.2d 272 (Okla. Crim. App. 1982). “In his first assignment of error, the defendant contends that he was denied a speedy trial guaranteed him under the state and federal constitutions and, since defendant asserted a denial thereof prior to trial, the court was bound to dismiss the pending charge under 22 O.S.1971,…”
Thacker v. Marshall, 331 P.2d 488 (Okla. Crim. App. 1958). “22 O.S.1951 § 812,-in that defendant has been deprived of a ■ speedy trial, when on the face of the record there was nothing to have prevented the county attorney • from scheduling the preliminary or preliminaries in the court of an examining magistrate, or obtaining a waiver,…”
Application of Melton, 342 P.2d 571 (Okla. Crim. App. 1959). “, in returning an accused to the state, who, on his own voli *573 tion, placed himself beyond the jurisdiction of the state and in the custody of the Federal Government.”
Wilson v. Dist. Court of Oklahoma Cnty., 471 P.2d 939 (Okla. Crim. App. 1970). · cites it 2× “No attempt to secure petitioner for purposes of trial has been made by Oklahoma County authorities and the charge is still pending against petitioner. Petitioner now contends that he has been denied his right to a speedy trial guaranteed by the United States Constitution, Sixth…”
Fike v. State, 388 P.2d 347 (Okla. Crim. App. 1963). “” It is provided by statute (22 O.S.1961 § 812): “If a defendant, prosecuted for a public offense, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application, is not brought to trial at the next term of court in which the indictment or information is triable after it is filed, the…”
Martin v. State, 449 P.2d 275 (Okla. Crim. App. 1969). “Title 22 O.S. § 812, provides: “If a defendant, prosecuted for a public offense, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application, is not brought to trial at the next term of court in which the indictment or information is triable after it is filed, the court must order…”
Show all 26 citing cases →
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.