Court Opinion

ID: 9565374
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:19:39.32421+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:35.373954
License: Public Domain

CORNISH, Judge,
specially concurring.
I fully concur in Judge Brett’s analysis and application of the Supreme Court’s precedents in this case. I would simply note that it has been settled in this State for several years that probable cause will not support a warrantless search in the absence of an emergency, i.e., “exigent circumstances”:
*725[I]t is without question that the existence of probable cause alone will not satisfy a warrantless search. Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); Whitehead v. State, 546 P.2d 273 (Okl.Cr.1976). Ordinarily, if an officer has probable cause to make a search, then he should go to a magistrate for a warrant authorizing such a search. Only when there are ‘exigent circumstances’ in addition to the existence of probable cause may an officer legitimately make a search without a warrant.
Blackburn v. State, 575 P.2d 638, 642 (Okl. Cr.1978).
Absent probable cause to search the entire car, the officers were only authorized to seize the suspect containers and hold them pending issuance of a search warrant. Although probable cause existed with regard to the containers, no exigent circumstances were shown such as to justify a warrantless search.