Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Oklahoma · Title 22 — Criminal Procedure

§22-812.2. Right to speedy trial – Review process.

685 words·~3 min read·/ok/title-22-criminal-procedure/22-812-2·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

A. Whenever the court finds that a case should be reviewed to determine if the right of an accused to a speedy trial is being protected, the court shall:
1. Issue notice to the district attorney, the accused, and the attorney for the accused that the case will be reviewed by the court at a date and time which is not less than ten
(10)days nor more than twenty
(20)days from the date of the notice. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence or legal authority in support of its position; and
2. Take evidence from both parties regarding the appropriateness of the cause for the delay. At the hearing, the court shall consider whether the delay has occurred for any of the following reasons:
a. the extent to which the delay is the result of the
application of the accused or an attorney on behalf of
the accused,
b. the extent to which the delay is the result of the
fault of the accused or the attorney for the accused,
c. the accused is incompetent to stand trial,
d. a proceeding to determine the competency of the accused
to stand trial is pending and a determination cannot be
completed within the time limitations fixed for trial,
e. there is material evidence or a material witness which
is unavailable and that reasonable efforts have been
made to procure such evidence or witness, and there are
reasonable grounds to believe that such evidence or
witness can be obtained and trial commenced within a
reasonable time,
f. the accused is charged as a codefendant or
coconspirator and the court has determined that the
codefendants or coconspirators must be tried before
separate juries taken from separate jury panels,
g. the court has other cases pending for trial that are
for persons incarcerated prior to the case in question,
and the court does not have sufficient time to commence
the trial of the case within the time limitation fixed
for trial; provided, the case shall be commenced as
soon as practicable,
h. the court, state, accused, or the attorney for the
accused is incapable of proceeding to trial due to
illness or other exigent reason and it is unreasonable
to reassign the case,
i. no court reporter is available for the trial of the
case; provided, if the delay is pursuant to this
subparagraph, a court reporter shall be assigned within
sixty
(60)days of the hearing, and
j. due to other reasonable grounds the court does not have
sufficient time to commence the trial of the case
within the time limit fixed for trial; provided, the
court shall commence the trial case as soon thereafter
as practicable.
B. After hearing all the evidence and the legal arguments properly submitted, if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that none of the exceptions set out in paragraph 2 of subsection A of this section justify additional delay and the right of the accused to a speedy trial as provided in this section and
Section 812.1 of this title has been violated, the court shall dismiss the case.
C. If a preliminary hearing has been held, the case may be refiled upon a showing of newly discovered evidence which could not have been discovered prior to trial, unless the applicable statute of limitations has expired.
D. If a preliminary hearing has not been held, the case may be refiled upon good cause shown unless any applicable statute of limitations has expired.
E. After hearing all the evidence and the legal arguments properly submitted, if the court finds that the right of the accused to a speedy trial has not been violated, the court shall set the case for review within three
(3)months. If the case is still pending after the three-month period, the court shall conduct another review. The review of pending cases shall be a continuing responsibility of the court until final disposition of the case. Added by Laws 1999, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 6, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 1999. Amended by Laws 2024, c. 336, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2024.
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.