# Langham v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · February 22, 1990 · 787 P.2d 1279

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9631208

## Case

- **Full name:** Charles LANGHAM, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** February 22, 1990
- **Citations:** 787 P.2d 1279; 1990 OK CR 9; 1990 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 12; 1990 WL 17038
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Lane
- **Judges:** Johnson, Lumpkin, Parks, Brett, Lane
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9631208

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding search warrant invalid because the plain language of 22 O.S. § 1223, requiring a search warrant be supported by affidavit, was not followed
- finding search warrant invalid because the plain language of 22 O.S. § 1228, requiring a search warrant be supported by affidavit, was not followed

## Opinion text

LANE, V.P.J., specially
concurring.
I concur in the majority’s decision to adopt the “totality of the circumstances” test of Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 , 103 S.Ct. 2317 , 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). However, I am concerned that the opinion of the majority may be misleading when it appears to establish a test for magistrates to find a “fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.” I recognize that this is language that was used in the Gates decision, but it seems to suggest a lesser standard than I perceive. It should be noted that the Gates court concluded the opinion with the language “It is apparent, therefore, that the judge issuing the warrant had a ‘substantial basis for ... concluding]’ that probable cause to search the Gateses’ home and car existed.” 462 U.S. at 246 , 103 S.Ct. at 2336 , 76 L.Ed.2d at 553 . I think this language a better statement of the test, that is, when considered in the totality of the circumstances, there is a substantial basis for probable cause to believe the contraband or evidence is on the premises.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9631208. Public record. Not legal advice.