>

by Keaton Ross, Oklahoma Watch
May 30, 2025

Bills aimed at reducing fines and fees that burden criminal defendants and boosting statewide participation in a county-level mental health and diversion program have become law. 

The Legislature also approved tougher sentencing laws for crimes including child sexual abuse, accessory to murder, shooting into a dwelling and drunk driving before wrapping up business early on Friday morning. 

The latter two required veto overrides. Gov. Kevin Stitt argued Senate Bill 54, which expands the definition of aggravated drunk driving and requires offenders convicted of the crime to serve a minimum amount of jail time, was overly broad and harsh. He cited similar concerns in his veto message of Senate Bill 631, which adds shooting into a dwelling to the state’s 85% crimes list. 

“Oklahoma already punishes discharging a firearm at or into a building as a felony with up to 20 years in prison,” Stitt wrote. “Mandating 85% of time for cases that may involve no victim senselessly increases the burden on our criminal justice system, raises incarceration costs, and limits opportunity for reform.”

While Oklahoma has reduced its prison population by more than 15% since 2020, the rate of decline has stalled in recent years. The state ranks fourth nationally in imprisonment rate, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, trailing Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas. 

Most criminal justice reform conversations at the Capitol focused on making the reintegration process easier as a strategy to reduce recidivism.

House Bill 1460 by Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City, removes several fees from the state statutes, including a $300 electronic monitoring fee for Department of Corrections inmates enrolled in a GPS monitoring program and a $15 assessment for those convicted of a misdemeanor or felony DUI. Many of the fees are not reliably collected and most agencies will be able to absorb the costs, according to a House fiscal impact report. 

The initial version of HB1460 proposed eliminating a $40-per-month supervision fee assessed to defendants on district attorney’s probation, which generates about $10 million annually to the state’s general revenue fund. The bill was later amended to give courts more flexibility to waive the fee but not remove it entirely. 

West, who hosted an interim study on fines and fees reform in October, said it often costs the state more to collect on fee assessments than it brings in. 

“House Bill 1460 is a step in the right direction toward eliminating unjust financial penalties that make it harder for Oklahomans to get back on their feet after incarceration,” she said in a statement. “Without the burden of overwhelming fees, people will be better equipped to rebuild their lives and become productive members of society.”

A related bill by West, House Bill 1462, requires county clerks to certify that restitution has been paid before accepting payment for fines and fees. The bill unanimously passed the House and Senate and was signed into law by Stitt on Wednesday. 

Oklahoma’s rural communities stand to benefit from Senate Bill 251, which sets a minimum funding amount of about $62,500 for counties approved to start a new mental health or diversion program via the County Community Safety Investment Fund. The bill also expands allowable programs to include jail intake screening and reentry programs. 

Established through a vote of the people in 2016 and finally implemented in 2023, urban counties have used the money saved from incarcerating fewer people to hire diversion coordinators and expand programs. Options have been more limited in rural areas.

Oklahoma Watch reported in July that most counties statewide did not initially apply for a share of the money. In the previous formula, several of the state’s most sparsely populated counties were allotted $30,000 or less. 

“When you maximize these opportunities in rural Oklahoma, prosecutors and judges are going to use them,” Healthy Minds Initiative Policy Director Brittany Hayes said in a previous interview with Oklahoma Watch. “As much as we can get funding to these areas, we’ll see a major impact in how individuals with mental health disorders or behavioral health issues end up interacting with the criminal legal system.”

Other notable criminal justice bills approved this session include: 

• House Bill 2235 by Cyndi Munson, D-Oklahoma City: Increases compensation for wrongful convictions from a maximum, one-time payment of $150,000 to $50,000 per year incarcerated. Stitt line-item vetoed provisions authorizing free health insurance and tuition waivers at state universities for them and their children. 
• House Bill 1592 by John George, R-Newalla: Creates a new felony offense of organized retail crime and extends the sunset date for the organized retail crime task force by one year. Required a veto override. 
• House Bill 1003 by Jim Olsen, R-Roland: Increases Oklahoma’s age of consent from 16 to 18, with some Romeo and Juliet exceptions. 
• Senate Bill 690 by Michael Bergstrom, R-Adair: Allows inmates awaiting trial, sentencing or transfer in county jails to earn achievement credits.

House Bill 1574 by Mark Lawson, R-Sapulpa: Authorizes the Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs to inspect privately-run facilities that receive state dollars.

This article first appeared on Oklahoma Watch and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The post Oklahoma Enacts Fines and Fees Reform, Tougher Sentencing Laws appeared first on oklahomawatch.org

Oklahoma Watch, at oklahomawatch.org, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that covers public-policy issues facing the state.

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

This content provides a balanced report on recent criminal justice legislation in Oklahoma, presenting multiple perspectives including legislative actions, governor’s vetoes, and reform advocates’ statements. It covers both tougher sentencing laws and efforts to reduce financial burdens on defendants, reflecting a moderate approach that does not clearly favor a left-leaning reform agenda or a right-leaning tough-on-crime stance. The article’s neutral tone and inclusion of diverse viewpoints indicate a centrist political bias.