TELL US WHAT YOU THINK!!
This is a law that went into effect in 2006. It spells out who is responsible for the care of abused or neglected animals that have been lawfully removed. Not many are aware of this law, including judges throughout the state.
We need more awareness of our laws that pertain to animals. This is the only way to stop the 'good ol'days' way of handling situations that put animals at risk. Most times the law turns it's head because abused animals are not considered a priority. Understandable to a degree, but totally ignore it? I have only seen results when a situation has been brought to the public through the media. Then the law steps in, but not until then it seems. There was only one law enforcement agent that was willing to go the distance for us when we dealt with Charlie Johnson. Deputy Scott Hawkins, as seen in the news footage, was the ONLY man willing to step up and help.
READ THE LAW HERE:
§21-1680.4. Protective custody of abused or neglected animals – Bond hearing.
A. The purpose of this section is to provide a means by which
any abused or neglected animal, as described in Section 1685 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes, may:
1. Be removed from its present custody; or
2. Be made the subject of an order issued to the owner by the appropriate court to provide care to the animal by the owner of the animal or by another person at a location approved by the court, with the order setting forth the conditions under which the animal will be housed and cared for, and given protection and a humane disposition.
B. Any peace officer or animal control officer may:
1. Specify terms and conditions by which the owner or keeper may maintain custody of the animal at the expense of the owner to provide care for the animal. The specifications shall be counter-signed by the owner or keeper of the animal. Provided, however, that violation of the custody agreement of the animal may result in the impoundment of the animal; or
2. Obtain a court order to take custody of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated by removing the animal from its present location.
C. 1. After an animal has been seized and prior to any charges being filed, the agency that took custody of the animal shall, within seven (7) days from the date of seizure, petition the district court in the county in which the animal was seized for a bond hearing to determine the cost and care for the animal. The bond hearing shall be held as soon as practicable and not more than ten (10) business days from the date of application for the bond hearing. If the court finds that probable cause exists that an animal has been abused, the court may order immediate forfeiture of the animal to the agency that took custody of the animal. Provided, however, within seventy-two (72) hours of the order of forfeiture, the person owning or having charge or custody of the animal may post a security bond in an amount determined by the court that is sufficient to reimburse all reasonable and anticipated costs incurred by the agency caring for the animal from the date of seizure. Reasonable costs include, but are not limited to, medical care and boarding of the animal.
2. The bond shall be placed with the agency that took custody of the animal. The agency shall provide an accounting of expenses to the court when the animal is no longer in the custody of the agency or upon request by the court. The agency may petition the court for a subsequent bond hearing at any time. The bond hearing shall be held as soon as practicable and not more than ten (10) business days from the date of application for the bond hearing. When all expenses covered by the bond are exhausted and a subsequent bond has not been posted, the animal shall be forfeited to the agency.
3. If the animal is returned to the person who previously owned or had charge or custody of the animal, funds not used for the care of the animal shall be returned.
4. Nothing in this section shall prevent the euthanasia of a seized animal at any time as determined necessary by a licensed veterinarian of the state.
Added by Laws 2006, c. 188, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2006.
This is a law that went into effect in 2006. It spells out who is responsible for the care of abused or neglected animals that have been lawfully removed. Not many are aware of this law, including judges throughout the state.
We need more awareness of our laws that pertain to animals. This is the only way to stop the 'good ol'days' way of handling situations that put animals at risk. Most times the law turns it's head because abused animals are not considered a priority. Understandable to a degree, but totally ignore it? I have only seen results when a situation has been brought to the public through the media. Then the law steps in, but not until then it seems. There was only one law enforcement agent that was willing to go the distance for us when we dealt with Charlie Johnson. Deputy Scott Hawkins, as seen in the news footage, was the ONLY man willing to step up and help.
READ THE LAW HERE:
§21-1680.4. Protective custody of abused or neglected animals – Bond hearing.
A. The purpose of this section is to provide a means by which
any abused or neglected animal, as described in Section 1685 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes, may:
1. Be removed from its present custody; or
2. Be made the subject of an order issued to the owner by the appropriate court to provide care to the animal by the owner of the animal or by another person at a location approved by the court, with the order setting forth the conditions under which the animal will be housed and cared for, and given protection and a humane disposition.
B. Any peace officer or animal control officer may:
1. Specify terms and conditions by which the owner or keeper may maintain custody of the animal at the expense of the owner to provide care for the animal. The specifications shall be counter-signed by the owner or keeper of the animal. Provided, however, that violation of the custody agreement of the animal may result in the impoundment of the animal; or
2. Obtain a court order to take custody of any animal found neglected or cruelly treated by removing the animal from its present location.
C. 1. After an animal has been seized and prior to any charges being filed, the agency that took custody of the animal shall, within seven (7) days from the date of seizure, petition the district court in the county in which the animal was seized for a bond hearing to determine the cost and care for the animal. The bond hearing shall be held as soon as practicable and not more than ten (10) business days from the date of application for the bond hearing. If the court finds that probable cause exists that an animal has been abused, the court may order immediate forfeiture of the animal to the agency that took custody of the animal. Provided, however, within seventy-two (72) hours of the order of forfeiture, the person owning or having charge or custody of the animal may post a security bond in an amount determined by the court that is sufficient to reimburse all reasonable and anticipated costs incurred by the agency caring for the animal from the date of seizure. Reasonable costs include, but are not limited to, medical care and boarding of the animal.
2. The bond shall be placed with the agency that took custody of the animal. The agency shall provide an accounting of expenses to the court when the animal is no longer in the custody of the agency or upon request by the court. The agency may petition the court for a subsequent bond hearing at any time. The bond hearing shall be held as soon as practicable and not more than ten (10) business days from the date of application for the bond hearing. When all expenses covered by the bond are exhausted and a subsequent bond has not been posted, the animal shall be forfeited to the agency.
3. If the animal is returned to the person who previously owned or had charge or custody of the animal, funds not used for the care of the animal shall be returned.
4. Nothing in this section shall prevent the euthanasia of a seized animal at any time as determined necessary by a licensed veterinarian of the state.
Added by Laws 2006, c. 188, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 2006.
The Courts & Law
| Copyright 2008-2010 © Nektosha Trading Co. All rights reserved | Design by ShkoteWeb Services |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
We have no legal cases at this time. If you are working on an abuse/neglect case in Oklahoma, we will be happy to post it here.
You may find all the details about our court case with Charlie Johnson here:
You may find all the details about our court case with Charlie Johnson here: