Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 13, § 176.1 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sections 1 through 14 of this act shall be known and may be cited as the "Security of Communications Act". Added by Laws 1982, c. 343, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1990–2007 · leading case: Arnold v. State, 803 P.2d 1145 (Okla. Crim. App. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Arnold v. State, 803 P.2d 1145 (Okla. Crim. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “The Act provides that if one of the parties to an intercepted conversation has not given consent, the interception is prohibited and the information thus obtained is inadmissible in any judicial proceeding. See 13 O.”

State v. Mullens, 650 S.E.2d 169 (W. Va. 2007). “(2006); Okla. Stat. tit. 13, § 176.1 , et seq. (2002); Ore.”

United States v. Balbino Dejesus Tavarez, A/K/A Munchie, 40 F.3d 1136 (10th Cir. 1994). “Defendant alleges two infirmities with the application and order: (1) the application was requested by a district attorney who lacked jurisdiction to do so; and (2) both the application and order were deficient in their descriptions of the locations of the wiretaps.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.