{"data":{"id":"us-ok/okla.-stat.-tit.-13-13-176.9","jurisdiction":"us-ok","citation":"Okla. Stat. tit. 13, § 13-176.9","heading":"Application for court order - Contents - Additional","body":"evidence - Ex parte order - Specifications of order - Time\n\nlimitations - Reports - Emergency oral authorization.\n\nA. Each application for an order authorizing or approving the\n\ninterception of a wire, oral or electronic communication shall be\n\nmade in writing upon oath or affirmation to a judge of competent\n\njurisdiction and shall state the authority of the Attorney General\n\nto make such application. Each application shall include the\n\nfollowing information:\n\n1. The identity of the law enforcement officer initiating the\n\napplication and the district attorney authorizing the application to\n\nthe Attorney General;\n\n2. A full and complete statement of the facts and circumstances\n\nrelied upon by the Attorney General to justify that an order should\n\nbe issued, including:\n\na. details as to the particular offense that has been, is\n\nbeing or is about to be committed,\n\nb. a particular description of the nature and location of\n\nthe facilities from which, or the place where the\n\nwire, oral or electronic communications are to be\n\nintercepted,\n\nc. a particular description of the type of communications\n\nsought to be intercepted, and\n\nd. the identity of the person, if known, committing the\n\noffense and whose wire, oral or electronic\n\ncommunications are to be intercepted;\n\n3. A full and complete statement as to whether or not other\n\ninvestigative procedures have been tried and failed or why they\n\nreasonably appear to be either unlikely to succeed if tried or are\n\ntoo dangerous;\n\n4. A statement of the period of time for which the interception\n\nis required to be maintained, and, if the nature of the\n\ninvestigation is such that the authorization for interception should\n\nnot automatically be terminated when the described type of\n\ncommunication has been first obtained, a particular description of\n\nfacts establishing probable cause to believe that additional\n\ncommunications of the same type will occur thereafter;\n\n5. A full and complete statement of the facts concerning:\n\na. all previous applications made for authorization to\n\nintercept wire, oral or electronic communications\n\ninvolving any of the same persons, facilities or\n\nplaces specified in the application, and\n\nb. the action taken on each such application; and\n\n6. When the application is for the extension of an order, a\n\nstatement setting forth the results thus far obtained from the\n\ninterception or a reasonable explanation of the failure to obtain\n\nsuch results.\n\nB. The judge of competent jurisdiction may require the\n\napplicant to furnish additional testimony or documentary evidence in\n\nsupport of the application.\n\nC. Upon the submission of the application, an ex parte order\n\nmay be entered, as requested or as modified, authorizing\n\ninterception of wire, oral or electronic communications within the\n\nterritorial jurisdiction of the judicial district of the district\n\nattorney requesting the order if the judge of competent jurisdiction\n\ndetermines on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant\n\nthat:\n\n1. There is probable cause for belief that an individual is\n\ncommitting, has committed or is about to commit a particular offense\n\nenumerated in Section 176.7 of this title;\n\n2. There is probable cause to believe that particular\n\ncommunications concerning the offense will be obtained through such\n\ninterception;\n\n3. Normal investigative procedures have been tried and have\n\nfailed or reasonably appear to be either unlikely to succeed if\n\ntried or are too dangerous; or\n\n4. There is probable cause to believe that the facilities from\n\nwhich, or the place where the wire, oral or electronic\n\ncommunications are to be intercepted, are being used by an\n\nindividual or are about to be used in connection with the commission\n\nof such offense or are leased to, listed in the name of or commonly\n\nused by such person.\n\nD. Each order authorizing the interception of any wire, oral or\n\nelectronic communication shall specify:\ne facilities from\n\nwhich, or the place where the wire, oral or electronic\n\ncommunications are to be intercepted, are being used by an\n\nindividual or are about to be used in connection with the commission\n\nof such offense or are leased to, listed in the name of or commonly\n\nused by such person.\n\nD. Each order authorizing the interception of any wire, oral or\n\nelectronic communication shall specify:\n\n1. The identity of the person, if known, whose communications\n\nare to be intercepted;\n\n2. The nature and location of the communications facilities as\n\nto which, or the place where, authority to intercept is granted;\n\n3. A particular description of the type of communication sought\n\nto be intercepted and a statement of the particular offense to which\n\nit relates;\n\n4. The identity of the agency authorized to intercept the\n\ncommunications and of the person authorizing the application;\n\n5. The period of time during which such interception is\n\nauthorized, including a statement as to whether or not the\n\ninterception shall automatically terminate when the described\n\ncommunication has been first obtained; and\n\n6. An order authorizing the interception of a wire, oral or\n\nelectronic communication shall, upon request of the applicant,\n\ndirect that a communication common carrier, landlord, custodian or\n\nother person shall furnish the applicant as soon as possible all\n\ninformation, facilities and technical assistance necessary to\n\naccomplish the interception with a minimum of interference with the\n\nservices that such carrier, landlord, custodian or person is\n\nfurnishing to the person whose communications are sought to be\n\nintercepted. Any communication common carrier, landlord, custodian\n\nor other person furnishing such facilities or technical assistance\n\npursuant to the Security of Communications Act shall be compensated\n\ntherefor by the applicant at the prevailing rates and shall be\n\nimmune from any civil or criminal action or liability for compliance\n\nto an order under this or any other state or local law, rule,\n\nregulation or ordinance by reason of furnishing any such\n\ninformation, facilities or technical assistance.\n\nE. No order entered pursuant to this section may authorize the\n\ninterception of any wire, oral or electronic communication for any\n\nperiod longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the\n\nauthorization, or in any event, longer than thirty (30) days.\n\nExtensions of an order may be granted, but only upon application for\n\nan extension made in accordance with subsection A of this section\n\nand upon the meeting of the requirements of subsection C of this\n\nsection. The period of extension shall be no longer than the judge\n\nof competent jurisdiction deems necessary to achieve the purposes\n\nfor which the extension was granted, and in no event for longer than\n\nthirty (30) days. Every order and extension thereof shall contain a\n\nprovision that the authorization to intercept shall be executed as\n\nsoon as practicable, shall be conducted in such a way as to minimize\n\nthe interception of communications not otherwise subject to\n\ninterception under the Security of Communications Act and must\n\nterminate upon attainment of the authorized objective or within the\n\ntime authorized as provided by this section.\n\nF. Whenever an order authorizing interception is entered\n\npursuant to the Security of Communications Act, the order may\n\nrequire reports to be made to the Attorney General and the judge of\n\ncompetent jurisdiction who issued the order showing what progress\n\nhas been made toward achievement of the authorized objective and the\n\nneed for continued interception. The reports shall be made at such\n\nintervals as the judge of competent jurisdiction may require.\n\nG. Any other provision of this act notwithstanding, a judge of\n\ncompetent jurisdiction or a judge of the district court may grant\n\nemergency oral authorization to a law enforcement officer to\nogress\n\nhas been made toward achievement of the authorized objective and the\n\nneed for continued interception. The reports shall be made at such\n\nintervals as the judge of competent jurisdiction may require.\n\nG. Any other provision of this act notwithstanding, a judge of\n\ncompetent jurisdiction or a judge of the district court may grant\n\nemergency oral authorization to a law enforcement officer to\n\nintercept wire, oral or electronic communications for a period not\n\nto exceed twenty-four (24) hours under the following circumstances:\n\n1. When any emergency situation exists which poses the risk of\n\ndeath or bodily injury to any person, and there are reasonable\n\ngrounds to believe that such interception would avert such death or\n\nbodily injury; or\n\n2. When a law enforcement officer is investigating any offense\n\nof murder or conspiracy to commit murder, and there are reasonable\n\ngrounds to believe that such interception may prevent the\n\ndestruction of key evidence or the flight or escape of a suspect or\n\nmaterial witness.\n\nApplication of such emergency authorization shall be made orally\n\nby the Attorney General, a district attorney in whose territorial\n\njurisdiction the interception is to occur, or any such Assistant\n\nAttorney General or assistant district attorney as they may\n\ndesignate in writing. The oral application shall be made to a judge\n\nof competent jurisdiction or a judge of the district court, and\n\neither the prosecuting attorney making application or a law\n\nenforcement officer shall orally provide the relevant probable cause\n\nand emergency circumstances to the judge of competent jurisdiction\n\nor a judge of the district court, all of which shall be\n\nelectronically recorded. Any such emergency interception shall\n\nterminate upon attainment of the authorized objective or at the end\n\nof twenty-four (24) hours, whichever comes first. If the assistance\n\nof a communication common carrier is needed to implement the\n\ninterception, the person obtaining the emergency authorization shall\n\ncertify in writing to the communication common carrier that\n\nemergency oral authorization has been obtained and no warrant or\n\norder is required. The communication common carrier shall provide\n\nthe same facilities, information, and assistance as required under\n\nsubsection D of this section, and shall enjoy the same immunity from\n\ncivil and criminal penalties as is provided for therein.\n\nFollowing such oral authorization, the district attorney or\n\nassistant district attorney shall apply through the Attorney General\n\nfor an order pursuant to Section 176.7 of this title. The\n\napplication shall be made as soon as is practicable, and in no event\n\nlater than forty-eight (48) hours after termination of the\n\ninterception pursuant to the oral authorization. The written\n\napplication shall include an intelligible copy of the electronic\n\nrecording of the conversation in which the oral authorization was\n\ngranted. If the district attorney or the assistant district\n\nattorney fails to make such written application within forty-eight\n\n(48) hours after termination of the interception, or if written\n\nauthorization to intercept communications is denied, no information\n\nobtained pursuant to the emergency interception shall be admitted in\n\nany court or other proceeding.","path":["OK Code","Title 13"],"source_url":"https://www.oklegislature.gov/OK_Statutes/CompleteTitles/os13.pdf","current_through":"2026-08-14","vintage":"open-us-law v2026.08, retrieved 2026-09-14","retrieved_at":"2026-09-14T18:32:36Z","sha256":"905e194b9a20f11e717503fd134f4c1cd8a154a6c1140f20288ef89d40e2e3cf","source_id":"us-ok","stale":false,"prev":"us-ok/okla.-stat.-tit.-13-13-176.8","next":"us-ok/okla.-stat.-tit.-13-13-177.1"},"notice":"GroundRules: Original legal text. Not legal advice."}