Okla. Stat. » Title 22 — CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 1224.1 (2026)

Oral testimony supplemental to affidavit

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Before issuing a search warrant the judge may take oral testimony, sworn to under oath, supplemental to any affidavits. Provided, however, that such oral testimony shall be recorded, such record transcribed forthwith, and filed with the affidavits to support the search warrant. Laws 1971, c. 120, § 1, emerg. eff. May 3, 1971.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1972–1988 · leading case: Phelps v. State, 598 P.2d 254 (Okla. Crim. App. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Phelps v. State, 598 P.2d 254 (Okla. Crim. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “Title 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1, 2 provides that a magistrate may take oral testimony *257 to supplement an affidavit provided that such testimony is recorded, transcribed, and filed with the affidavit.”
Merry v. State, 766 P.2d 1377 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “In the present case, the testimony failed to meet the criteria under either section. It is unclear whether the testimony was transcribed as required by Section 1223.”
Coslow v. State, 495 P.2d 831 (Okla. Crim. App. 1972). “We also direct attention to the 1971 Legislative enactment designed to cure the problems arising from oral testimony taken to supplement an affidavit for the issuance of a search warrant found at 22 O.S., § 1224.1: “Before issuing a search warrant the judge may take oral…”
Woodard v. State, 567 P.2d 512 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “In such cases we deem it substantial compliance with 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1 if the recording, transcription and filing of oral testimony supporting a search warrant affidavit take place after the fact.”
Looney v. State, 520 P.2d 814 (Okla. Crim. App. 1974). “State, supra: “We also direct attention to the 1971 Legislative enactment designed to cure the problems arising from oral testimony taken to supplement an affidavit for the issuance of a search warrant found at 22 O.S. § 1224.1: ‘Before issuing a search warrant the judge may…”
Warthen v. State, 557 P.2d 466 (Okla. Crim. App. 1976). “Title 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1. Finding no indication of time of occurrence in the affidavit and there being no supplemental transcript to indicate that the magistrate was supplied with such information, this Court can only hold that the magistrate had insufficient facts upon which…”
Payne v. State, 520 P.2d 694 (Okla. Crim. App. 1974). “In support of this argument, defendant relies on 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1, which states: “Before issuing a search warrant the judge may take oral testimony, sworn to under oath, supplemental to any affidavits.”
Whitchurch v. State, 572 P.2d 266 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “Defendant also contends that oral testimony taken at the time the warrant was issued was not transcribed and filed until two days after the warrant was issued, and that 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1, requires that such testimony be transcribed and filed “forthwith,” and that reversible…”
Terry v. State, 666 P.2d 1305 (Okla. Crim. App. 1983). “According to 22 O.S.1971, § 1224.1, an affidavit may be supplemented by oral testimony so long as the transcript of any oral testimony is filed with the affidavit.”
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.