HB 1935 amends Oklahoma's statute of limitations for prosecuting certain criminal cases. It shortens the time limit for prosecuting embezzlement of public funds (including school district funds) and specific financial crimes from 7 to 5 years after discovery. For sexual crimes against children, prosecutions can now continue until the victim's 45th birthday, while cases involving DNA evidence preserved at the time of the crime may proceed even after standard time limits expire. The bill also prohibits relying solely on recovered memories from therapy in such cases and sets a 3-year limit for wildlife crimes and fraud.
SB 76 clarifies Oklahoma's parole revocation process by explicitly authorizing both the Governor and the Pardon and Parole Board to revoke parole for violations, rather than relying solely on the Department of Corrections. It requires parolees arrested for violations to be jailed immediately, halting parole time and earned credits until a revocation decision is made. The bill also creates a new option: parolees may be placed in specialized correctional programs (intermediate sanctions facilities) instead of facing full revocation for minor violations, at the Department's discretion. This law, effective November 1, 2025, directly affects people on parole in Oklahoma who violate terms, and the state agencies managing parole.
SB 369 expands the definition of aggravated assault and battery against law enforcement officers in Oklahoma. It specifically includes attempts to gain control of an officer's firearm or strangulation as qualifying offenses. The law applies to police officers, sheriffs, deputies, highway patrol officers, corrections personnel, and state/federal peace officers enforcing state laws while on duty. This change makes those specific acts punishable as a felony with penalties including up to life in prison or a $5,000 fine. The bill was approved by the governor on May 3, 2025, and is now in effect.
HB 1591 requires individuals convicted of 25 specific serious crimes in Oklahoma to serve at least 85% of their prison sentence before becoming eligible for parole. This applies to offenses like first-degree murder, child sex trafficking, domestic violence with weapons, human trafficking, and certain violent assaults. The bill prohibits earned credits or other sentence reductions that would allow offenders to serve less than 85% of their sentence. It becomes effective November 1, 2025, and directly affects those sentenced for the listed crimes under Oklahoma law.
HB 1579 sets salary limits for juvenile bureau staff in Oklahoma counties, capping directors' pay at 90% of Class A county officer salaries and other employees at 85%. It requires juvenile court judges (with county commissioner oversight) to establish expense limits for bureau operations and mandates that all bureau costs - salaries and expenses - be funded through county budgets or dedicated sales taxes. The bill also specifies that county excise boards must appropriate funds for bureau staffing and operations, consistent with other county officer budgets. Additionally, it clarifies that district attorneys represent juvenile bureaus in lawsuits, unless conflicts arise. The law became effective November 1, 2025.
SB 871 modifies Oklahoma's law against eluding police officers by updating penalty structures for different offenses. For first-time offenders, it increases the maximum fine for misdemeanor eluding from $2,000 to $5,000 and raises the jail term for second offenses to up to one year. If eluding endangers others, the offense becomes a felony punishable by 1-5 years in state prison; if it causes "great bodily injury" (defined as serious harm like permanent disfigurement or long-term disability), penalties increase to 1-7 years. The bill also clarifies legal language around these offenses and takes effect November 1, 2025. It directly affects drivers convicted of eluding police in Oklahoma.
HB 1593 prevents prosecutors from disqualifying peace officers as witnesses based on unproven misconduct allegations. It allows officers who are placed on a "Do Not Call" list for alleged misconduct to dispute the claim by filing a petition with the Attorney General. An administrative law judge will hold a hearing to review the allegations, and if the misconduct claim isn't proven by a preponderance of evidence, the officer must be reinstated as credible. Courts must then consider the judge's findings when evaluating the officer's testimony. This bill directly affects peace officers and changes how misconduct allegations impact their ability to testify in criminal cases.