Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
State of Oklahoma v. Shannon Jean Basks
Date: 04-14-2025
Case Number: CF-2023-3406
Judge: Clifford Smith
Court: In the District Court in and for Tulsa County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney: Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Tulsa Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory
Use of a telecommunications device in a drug transaction in violation of 13 O.S. 176.3 (8)
MoreLaw was created to help people find experienced lawyers to represent them in the more than 3,144 counties across the United States. Click the link above to see a list of lawyers ready and willing to represent you if you have a legal problem and need help.
Sponsored By
MoreLaw Downtown Tulsa Office Suites
624 South Denver, Suite 300
One Block South of the Courthouse
Free Internet Marketing
Broadband Internet Access & Answering Service
Full-Time Receptionist - 24/7 Access
Virtual Offices Starting at $50 a month.
Physical Offices Starting at $300 a month.
Month-to-Month
Multiple Private Conference Rooms - Hourly & Daily Rental
Reduce Your Overhead with MoreLaw Suites
918-582-3993 - Info@MoreLaw.com
13 O.S. 176.3 (8) Provides:
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this act, any person is guilty of a felony and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not less than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or by imprisonment of not more than five (5) years, or by both who:
1. Willfully intercepts, endeavors to intercept or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, oral or electronic communication;
2. Willfully uses, endeavors to use or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical or other device to intercept any oral communication;
3. Willfully discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained in violation of the provisions of the Security of Communications Act;
4. Willfully uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained in violation of the provisions of the Security of Communications Act;
5. Willfully and maliciously, without legal authority, removes, injures or obstructs any telephone or telegraph line, or any part or appurtenances or apparatus connected thereto, or severs any wires thereof;
6. Sends through the mail or sends or carries any electronic, mechanical or other device with the intention of rendering the device primarily useful for the purpose of the illegal interception of wire, oral or electronic communications in violation of the provisions of the Security of Communications Act;
7. Manufactures, assembles, possesses or sells any electronic, mechanical or other device with the intention of rendering the device primarily useful for the purpose of the illegal interception of wire, oral or electronic communications in violation of the provisions of the Security of Communications Act; or
8. Willfully uses any communication facility in committing or in causing or facilitating the commission of any act or acts constituting one or more of the felonies enumerated in Section 176.7 of this title. Each separate use of a communication facility to cause or facilitate such a felony shall be a separate offense. Venue for any violation of this section shall lie in the same county as venue for the underlying felony enumerated in Section 176.7 of this title.
COUNT 1) THREE (3) YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS- SUSPENDED . DEFENDANT TO BE UNDER NO FORMAL SUPERVISION. . DEFENDANT ASSESSED COSTS ONLY.
COUNT 3) THREE (3) YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS- SUSPENDED . DEFENDANT TO BE UNDER NO FORMAL SUPERVISION . DEFENDANT ASSESSED COSTS ONLY.
ALL COUNTS TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH EACH OTHER AND CASE TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH CHEROKEE COUNTY PROBATION.
DEFENDANT ADVISED OF APPEAL RIGHTS, RULE 8 ISSUED, JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE ISSUED. RELEASE ISSUED.
About This Case
What was the outcome of State of Oklahoma v. Shannon Jean Basks?
The outcome was: DEFENDANT ENTERS A PLEA OF GUILTY AND WAIVES RIGHTS TO JURY, NON-JURY TRIAL. COURT ACCEPTS PLEA, DEFENDANT SENTENCED TO: COUNT 1) THREE (3) YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS- SUSPENDED . DEFENDANT TO BE UNDER NO FORMAL SUPERVISION. . DEFENDANT ASSESSED COSTS ONLY. COUNT 3) THREE (3) YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS- SUSPENDED . DEFENDANT TO BE UNDER NO FORMAL SUPERVISION . DEFENDANT ASSESSED COSTS ONLY. ALL COUNTS TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH EACH OTHER AND CASE TO RUN CONCURRENT WITH CHEROKEE COUNTY PROBATION. DEFENDANT ADVISED OF APPEAL RIGHTS, RULE 8 ISSUED, JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE ISSUED. RELEASE ISSUED.
Which court heard State of Oklahoma v. Shannon Jean Basks?
This case was heard in In the District Court in and for Tulsa County, Oklahoma, OK. The presiding judge was Clifford Smith.
Who were the attorneys in State of Oklahoma v. Shannon Jean Basks?
Plaintiff's attorney: Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Tulsa Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory.
When was State of Oklahoma v. Shannon Jean Basks decided?
This case was decided on April 14, 2025.