Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney | Search Warrant Affidavit | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office
If you’ve been charged with a crime, you need somebody who will fight for you. Call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. Attorney Cale also provides you with a free defense strategy plan that you can take with you.
The defendant was charged wider County district court with possession of controlled dangerous substance in the presence of a minor and possession of drug paraphernalia. He was sentenced to 12 years prison. On appeal, he contended that the trial court erroneously used to suppress the evidence used against him from his home.
The trial court ruling on the suppression of evidence viewed for an abuse of discretion. An abuse of discretion is a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment. It is one that is clearly against the logic and effect that is head. When reviewing the trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence, the Oklahoma court criminal appeals will accept the court’s factual findings less those findings are clearly erroneous and view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Whether a search or seizure is a response a question of law.
The defendant asserted that the affidavit supported the search warrant is not sufficient to conclude probable cause for a search. He maintained that the supporting affidavit was full of conclusions and sentence. He looked at each individual paragraph the affidavit tells the information contained in it. He further asserted that the affidavit contained a false statement.
When reviewing the validity of a search warrant affidavit, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals will look at the totality of the circumstances, said Tulsa convince attorney Stephen Cale. Under the totality of the circumstances approach, disc of the issuing judge is simply to make a practical, commonsense is your decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, including the truthfulness basis of the known persons hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. For there to be a valid finding of probable cause, the affidavit must set forth ask circumstances to enable the judge to independently determine whether the person making the affidavit concludes the evidence of the crimes where the says that is.
It’s the duty the appellate court to simply ensure that the Mac had a substantial basis for concluding the probable cause existed. Further, the appellate court will give the trial court great deference in fighting probable cause.
A sworn affidavit supporting a search warrant is presumed to be valid, but that presumption can be attacked and rebutted, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. You may be attacked by allegations that the affidavit contained intentional falsehoods or reckless disregard for the truth, allegations of negligence or as a are not sufficient. Evidence of perjury or reckless disregard for the truth and affiant statements was being established by the preponderance of the evidence.
Additionally, there was removed from consideration in the remains sufficient allegations to support a finding of probable cause, the inaccuracies are not relevant. To determine this issue, a reviewing court will ask whether the warrant we been in touch had been given accurate information.
Hand, the defendant failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the deputy who made the affidavit deliberately made all statements right with reckless disregard when he put the statements at issue of the affidavit.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said that the defendant should best that the deputy was negligent for failing to verify the challenge. Such negligence or innocent this mistake is not sufficient to overcome the present the validity of the sworn affidavit.
Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale works hard to try to attack and also affidavit for our arrest or for a search warrant. This is just one the ways that he tries to get a charge dismissed. If you’ve been charged with a crime, call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800 to schedule your free initial consultation.
Additionally, the appellate court found that the judge had a substantial basis for his probable cause finding even if the challenged statements were admitted from the search warrant. Therefore, the defendant failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s refusal to suppress the search warrant was an abuse of discretion.
Oklahoma statutes do not specifically outline a method of jury selection. The method of jury selection is discretionary the trial court. The defendant will be given an opportunity to examine or question each prospective juror to determine whether grounds exist to child center for cause. With the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals releases where the answers of potential jurors are not clear or equivocal, it traditionally defers to the impression the trial court it can best whether a potential juror would be unable to fill his or her oath. The trial court is better able to observe potential jurors demeanor consider instances. Therefore, the appellate court will give deference to the trial court’s decision to remove him or her.
Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale has extensive jury experience. His trials and misdemeanors to felonies, including murder and sex crimes cases. If you’ve been charged the crime and once somebody will fight it, give him a call at 918-277-4800.
A claim of juror misconduct before criminal cases very must be established by clear and convincing evidence. The defendant must show actual prejudice from Erie jury conduct in defense counsel’s peer speculation and surmise is insufficient upon which to cause a reversal. The appellate court will not disturb the trial court’s refusal to allow additional questioning or excuse the allegedly offending juror for misconduct without an abuse of discretion.
A search yielded item seen them sister during the crime, these items included clothing in a gun that was in the possession of a victim. The defendant filed a motion press on a prior to trial, arguing that the affidavit for search warrant lacked probable cause. He also said that nighttime authorization was improper and state statutes. However, the trial court denied the motion to suppress.
The U. S. Supreme Court is held that an affidavit that supports a factually sufficient search warrant must be attacked upon allegations that the affidavit contained intentional lies or reckless disregard for the truth. The inaccuracies are removed from consideration in their still remains sufficient allegations to support a finding of probable cause, the inaccuracies are not relevant.