Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

State of Oklahoma v. J.A.C.

Date: 10-09-2025

Case Number: CF-2025-100

Judge: Kelly Hake

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Kendal Kelly

Defendant's Attorney: Jason Riddle

Description:
Sapulpa, Oklahoma criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with a crime against nature - Beastiality in violation of 21 O.S.C. 886.

The text of 21 O.S. § 886 states:"Every person who is guilty of the detestable and abominable crime against nature, committed with mankind or with a beast, is guilty of a Class B4 felony offense..."Under the companion statute, 21 O.S. § 887, the law clarifies the threshold for completion of the offense, stating that "any sexual penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime against nature."Penalties and ConsequencesA conviction under this statute carries heavy criminal penalties and long-term legal repercussions:Imprisonment: It is classified as a Class B4 felony. A conviction is punishable by a term in the custody of the Department of Corrections not exceeding ten (10) years.Mandatory Supervision: Anyone sentenced to a prison term of two (2) years or more under this section must also complete a mandatory term of post-imprisonment supervision. This supervision acts in addition to the time served behind bars.Sex Offender Registration: Individuals convicted of bestiality under the umbrella of a crime against nature are subject to mandatory registration as a sex offender.Legal Context and Overlapping ChargesWhile the "crime against nature" wording historically covered both sodomy and bestiality, appellate court rulings and federal precedents (such as Lawrence v. Texas) rendered the law unconstitutional to enforce against consenting adults engaging in private sexual conduct. However, the law remains fully enforceable and actively used by prosecutors for instances of bestiality.Additionally, individuals accused of bestiality in Oklahoma are frequently hit with companion charges, most notably cruelty to animals under 21 O.S. § 1685.

Reported by Kent Morlan
Outcome:
A criminal charge is not proof of guilt,
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of State of Oklahoma v. J.A.C.?

The outcome was: A criminal charge is not proof of guilt,

Which court heard State of Oklahoma v. J.A.C.?

This case was heard in District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, OK. The presiding judge was Kelly Hake.

Who were the attorneys in State of Oklahoma v. J.A.C.?

Plaintiff's attorney: Kendal Kelly. Defendant's attorney: Jason Riddle.

When was State of Oklahoma v. J.A.C. decided?

This case was decided on October 9, 2025.