Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 47, § 751 (2026)

Implied consent to breath test, blood test or other test

✓ current as of July 2026

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

for determining presence or concentration of alcohol or other intoxicating substance. A. 1. Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public roads, highways, streets, turnpikes or other public place or upon any private road, street, alley or lane which provides access to one or more single or multi-family dwellings within this state shall be deemed to have given consent to a test or tests of such person's blood or breath, for the purpose of determining the alcohol concentration as defined in Section 756 of this title, and such person's blood, saliva or urine for determining the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance therein as defined in this section, if arrested for any offense arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while the person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon the public roads, highways, streets, turnpikes or other public place or upon any private road, street, alley or lane which provides access to one or more single or multi-family dwellings while under the influence of

alcohol or other intoxicating substance, or the combined influence of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance, or if the person is involved in a traffic accident that resulted in the immediate death or serious injury of any person and is removed from the scene of the accident to a hospital or other health care facility outside the State of Oklahoma before a law enforcement officer can effect an arrest. 2. A law enforcement officer, having reasonable grounds to believe that such person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence may direct the administration of or administer the test or tests. As used in this title, the term "other intoxicating substance" shall mean any controlled dangerous substance as defined in the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act and any other substance, other than alcohol, which is capable of being ingested, inhaled, injected or absorbed into the human body and is capable of adversely affecting the central nervous system, vision, hearing or other sensory or motor functions. B. The law enforcement agency by which the arresting officer is employed may designate, in accordance with the rules of the Board of Tests for Alcohol and Drug Influence, hereinafter referred to as the Board, whether blood or breath is to be tested for the alcohol concentration thereof, and whether blood, saliva or urine is to be tested for the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance therein. In the event that law enforcement agency does not designate the test to be administered, breath shall be the substance tested for alcohol concentration. Blood may also be tested to determine the alcohol concentration thereof in the event that breath cannot be tested to determine the alcohol concentration thereof because of the lack of an approved device or qualified person to administer a breath test or because such breath test for any other reason cannot be administered in accordance with the rules of the Board. In the event the law enforcement agency does not designate the test to be administered, blood, saliva or urine shall be the substance tested for the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance or the combination of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance. C. In the event the person is incapable of submitting to and successfully completing, by reason of illness or injury or other physical disability, the test to be administered, an alternate test may be administered in accordance with the rules of the Board. D. Any person who is unconscious or otherwise incapable of refusing to submit to a test of such person's blood or breath to determine the alcohol concentration thereof, or to a test of such person's blood, saliva or urine to determine the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance therein, shall be

deemed not to have withdrawn the consent provided by subsection A of this section, and such test may be administered as provided herein. An unconscious person who has been issued a citation by a law enforcement officer for one of the offenses listed in subsection A of this section is arrested for purposes of this section. The arresting officer must leave a copy of the citation with the arrested person which may be accomplished by handing it to the arrested person, or by leaving it with the personal effects of the arrested party, so as to inform the unconscious person of the arrest. Any person who has been arrested for one of the offenses listed in subsection A of this section who is unconscious or injured and who requires immediate medical treatment as determined by a treating physician may be released on the person's own recognizance for medical reasons by the arresting officer. The arresting officer who releases an arrested person on the person's own recognizance must indicate the release on the face of the citation. Any person released on his or her own recognizance for medical reasons shall remain at liberty pending the filing of charges. E. In addition to any test designated by the arresting officer, the arrested person may also designate any additional test to be administered to determine the concentration of alcohol, or the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance or the combination of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance. The cost of such additional test shall be at the expense of the arrested person. A sufficient quantity of any specimen obtained at the designation of the arrested person shall be available to the law enforcement agency employing the arresting officer. Such specimens shall be treated in accordance with the rules applicable to the specimens obtained by an arresting officer. F. When a law enforcement officer has determined that the blood alcohol content of an individual is to be tested for the presence or concentration of alcohol, other intoxicating substance, or the combination of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance, the law enforcement officer shall inform the individual to be tested that the withdrawal of blood shall only be performed by certain medical personnel as provided for in Section 752 of this title. G. The results of the tests provided for in this title shall be admissible in all civil actions, including administrative hearings regarding driving privileges. Added by Laws 1967, c. 86, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1969. Amended by Laws 1975, c. 119, § 1, emerg. eff. May 13, 1975; Laws 1982, c. 273, § 4, operative Oct. 1, 1982; Laws 1982, c. 294, § 2, operative July 1, 1982; Laws 1994, c. 387, § 6, eff. July 1, 1995; Laws 1995, c. 313, § 4, eff. July 1, 1995; Laws 1999, c. 106, § 6, emerg. eff. April 19, 1999; Laws 2002, c. 410, § 1, eff. Nov. 1, 2002; Laws 2004, c.

548, § 2, emerg. eff. June 9, 2004; Laws 2005, c. 1, § 58, emerg. eff. March 15, 2005; Laws 2005, c. 189, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2005; Laws 2006, c. 173, § 4, eff. July 1, 2006; Laws 2017, c. 392, § 10, eff. Nov. 1, 2017; Laws 2019, c. 400, § 12, eff. Nov. 1, 2019. NOTE: Laws 2004, c. 418, § 20 repealed by Laws 2005, c. 1, § 59, emerg. eff. March 15, 2005.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 64 cases, 1971–2020 · leading case: Hunsucker v. Fallin, 2017 OK 100 (Okla. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hunsucker v. Fallin, 2017 OK 100 (Okla. 2017). · cites it 2× “643, § 10, amends 47 O.S.2011 § 751. 41 S. B. No. 643, § 11, amends 47 O.”

Sartin v. State, 617 P.2d 219 (Okla. Crim. App. 1980). · cites it 8× “Here, the blood test was taken by a doctor at a highway patrolman's request, pursuant to 47 O.S.Supp. 1975, § 751, et seq., known as the "implied consent" statute.”

Smith v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 680 P.2d 365 (Okla. 1984). · cites it 2× “Two questions are presented on appeal: (1) Did the arresting officer effect a valid arrest which invoked the Implied Consent Statute, 47 O.S.1981 §§ 751 et seq., and (2) was the evidence presented to the District Court sufficient to support its judgment? We answer both questions…”

Cole v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 2020 OK 67 (Okla. 2020). “FOOTNOTES 1 See 47 O.S.2011, §§ 751, 753. 2 Title 47 O.S.”

In re the Appeal of the Revocation of the Driver's License of Dungan, 681 P.2d 750 (Okla. 1984). · cites it 2× “She urges that she was never placed under custodial arrest because she voluntarily went to the police station to wait for Officer Cowell at his direction.”

White v. Oklahoma Dep't of Pub. Saf., 606 P.2d 1131 (Okla. 1980). · cites it 2× “SIMMS, Justice: Appeal from judgment of the District Court of Oklahoma County which affirmed an order of the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety revoking the driver’s license of appellant pursuant to Oklahoma’s Implied Consent Law, 47 O.S.Supp.1975, § 751, et seq. Appellant was…”

State v. Wood, 576 P.2d 1181 (Okla. Crim. App. 1978). · cites it 2× “The blood test was taken by a doctor at a highway patrolman’s request, pursuant to 47 O.S.Supp.1975, § 751, et seq., known as the “implied consent” statute.”

Harris v. State, 773 P.2d 1273 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “1984) the Court denied the admissibility of a refusal to submit to a sobriety test, holding: A plain reading of Oklahoma's Implied Consent Law, 47 O.S.Supp. 1983, §§ 751 et seq, demonstrates that the legislature granted an absolute right to one arrested for DUI to refuse to…”

Marquardt v. Webb, 545 P.2d 769 (Okla. 1976). · cites it 2× “In the present appeal, Appellant urges as error that: (1) The trial court erred in granting jurisdiction to the Department of Public Safety since there was no legal arrest, and that the Implied Consent Law (47 O.S. § 751) is not applicable. (Appellant contends this is…”

Manning v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 876 P.2d 667 (Okla. 1994). “47 O.S.1991 §§ 751 et seq. The pertinent terms of § 751 are: "Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public roads, .”

Burris v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 785 P.2d 332 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Appellant contends that if a second test was permissible, he should have been re-advised of his rights under the implied consent statute, 47 O.S.Supp.1982 § 751. He further contends it was error not to restore his license since the State did not prove he was under the influence…”

Napier v. State, 821 P.2d 1062 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “1981, § 11-902 and 47 O.S.1981, § 751, et seq. is “arrest”. However, the Court does not address or reconcile the provisions of 47 O.”

Show all 64 citing cases →

— Okla. Stat. tit. 47, § 751(A) — 6 cases

Rittman v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 875 P.2d 439 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994).

Post v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 889 P.2d 1290 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).

Richards v. State, ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 872 P.2d 957 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994).

Tripp v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 117 P.3d 266 (Okla. Civ. App. 2005).

Guest v. State, 2002 OK CR 5 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002).

— Okla. Stat. tit. 47, § 751(A)(1) — 5 cases

Justus v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 61 P.3d 888 (Okla. 2002).

Martinez v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 321 P.3d 991 (Okla. Civ. App. 2013).

Martinez v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 2014 OK CIV APP 17 (Okla. Civ. App. 2013).

Pletcher v. State Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 2003 OK 117 (Okla. 2004).

Justus v. State Ex Rel. Dps, 2002 OK 46 (Okla. 2002).

— Okla. Stat. tit. 47, § 751(D) — 1 case

Napier v. State, 821 P.2d 1062 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). “1981, § 11-902 and 47 O.S.1981, § 751, et seq. is “arrest”. However, the Court does not address or reconcile the provisions of 47 O.”

— Okla. Stat. tit. 47, § 751(E) — 1 case

Kelley v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Pub. Saf., 350 P.3d 429 (Okla. Civ. App. 2015).

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.