Court Opinion

ID: 9543582
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:46:49.939564+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:10:37.929113
License: Public Domain

LUMPKIN, Vice-Presiding Judge:
dissents.
I must respectfully dissent to the Court’s decision in this case. It appears the Court, as well as the trial court, has misread and misapplied the plain language of 22 O.S.Supp.1990, § 1230. The language of Section 1230 provides:
Search warrants shall be served during the hours of six o’clock a.m. to ten o’clock p.m., inclusive, unless the affidavits be positive that the property is on the person, or in the place to be searched and the judge finds that there is likelihood that the property named in the search warrant will be destroyed, moved or concealed. In which case the judge may insert a direction that it be served at any time of the day or night, (emphasis added)
The statute requires the affidavit to be positive that the property is on the person or place to be searched. The affidavit in this case met that pleading criteria. The second part does not require a formal *193pleading of the likelihood that the property will be destroyed, moved or concealed, but only that the judge make that finding. In this case the judge made that finding based on the evidence received from a named informant who had observed the contraband within approximately six (6) hours of the time the warrant was issued at 1:00 a.m. and the statements of the affiant regarding the confirmation of some of the facts relayed by the informant. When the affidavit is considered in its totality it supports the finding by the issuing magistrate. The Court seeks to apply Section 1230 as to require a pleading rather than a finding to support the authorization for a nighttime search. However, that is not required by the statutory language. The correct standard is to review the issuing magistrate’s finding to determine if it is supported by the affidavit and is not an abuse of discretion. In this case, the warrant was properly issued and the authority to execute a nighttime search was properly granted, based on the totality of the affidavit. It is not necessary to address the issues raised in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), because the issuance of this warrant met the criteria set forth under Section 1230.