It looks to me that the first revision of Section 983 still goes into effect on 7-1-23 and will be superseded on 11-1-23. My court clerk said they were taught in clerks conference that the first revision of Section 983 does not go into effect on 7-1-23. Any thoughts? Raymond A. Vincent Raymond A. Vincent, PLLC 1919 S. Sunnylane Rd., Suite 200 Del City, Oklahoma 73115 405-235-0484 Fax 405-236-3689 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE This e-mail transmission, and all documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, are being sent by an attorney and may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. This transmission is intended solely for the exclusive use of the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you.

In my opinion, the statutes that were adopted in 2022 but set to be effective July 1, 2023, did not go into effect. The 2022 Bill contained express language stating that Sections 2-6 would be effective July 1, 2023. The Legislature then adopted HB 2259 this session which essentially addressed the same topics and most of the same statutes (namely, 983), and clearly the legislature intended that what they were adopting in that Bill would go into effect November 1, 2023, and that the July 1 language would not go into effect. They included a repealer clause that repealed Sections 2-6 from the 2022 bill. But the problem was - the effective date of HB 2259 was November 1, which means the repealer wasn't effective until November 1. The issue was identified after HB 2259 was signed by the Governor. I know we reached out on it. I was told that Jari Askins was able to make a deal with some Legislators to fix the repealer issue. The vehicle they used was SB 907. The Bill had nothing to do with Courts and fines/costs, and was in conference committee. From what I gathered, the Conference Committee was not going to reach an agreement on the Bill and agreed to use that Bill as a vehicle to fix the repealer issue. The used a Conference Committee substitute to gut the entire Bill and replace it wtih 2 simple sections - Section 1 was to repeal Sections 2-6 from the 2022 Bill, and Section 2 was an emergency clause that made the Bill effective immediately. The Conference Committee substitute was sent back to both chambers, who quickly adopted it unanimously, and Governor Stitt signed it June 7. As such, the repealers was effective as of June 7 - prior to the July 1 effective date. Here's a link to the final version that was adopted and signed: http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2023-24%20ENR/SB/SB907%20ENR.PDF The folks at OSCN appear to be having a bit of a fit because of SB 623. Section 3 of the Bill contained an amendment to the language from Section 5 of the 2022 Bill (related to 983) which was only to amend the new sub-J to change the references to DPS to Service Oklahoma. Governor Stitt Vetoed the Bill and was overridden by the Legislature on May 25. So it appears OSCN was confused on what to do. You had the repealer that killed the entire July 1 language, but then you had another Bill adopted prior to the repealer Bill that made one very minor change to the July 1 language with that change not being effective until July 1 (i.e. the same time as the original, 2022, language would go into effect). So you had a Bill that contained a minor amendment to a statute that had not yet gone into effect, and then before it or the amendment went into effect the Legislature repealed the statute altogether! My opinion - the repealer controls. SB 623 didn't purport to independently enact new language in 983 - it only was going to amend language that had not yet gone into effect, and a very minor amendment at that. Since the language was repealed before it went into effect, the minor amendment essentially became moot. Matt On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:07 PM <rayvincent@coxinet.net> wrote: > It looks to me that the first revision of Section 983 still goes into > effect on 7-1-23 and will be superseded on 11-1-23. My court clerk said > they were taught in clerks conference that the first revision of Section > 983 does not go into effect on 7-1-23. Any thoughts? > > Raymond A. Vincent > Raymond A. Vincent, PLLC > 1919 S. Sunnylane Rd., Suite 200 > Del City, Oklahoma 73115 > 405-235-0484 > Fax 405-236-3689 > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE > > This e-mail transmission, and all documents, files or previous e-mail > messages attached to it, are being sent by an attorney and may contain > information that is confidential or legally privileged. This transmission > is intended solely for the exclusive use of the named recipient. If you are > not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to > the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this > transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or > use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission > is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, > please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and > delete the original transmission and its attachments without reading or > saving in any manner. Thank you. > > -- > Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org > To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org >