OPINION — AG — (1) A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER MAY LEAVE THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE MUNICIPAL ENTITY WHICH HE SERVES TO SPEAK WITH WITNESSES AND OTHER POLICE OFFICERS CONCERNING A CRIME COMMITTED IN HIS JURISDICTION. (2) A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER MAY LEAVE THE MUNICIPAL ENTITY WHICH HE SERVES TO INVESTIGATE AND GATHER EVIDENCE CONCERNING A CRIME COMMITTED IN HIS JURISDICTION, BUT POSSESSES NO GREATER AUTHORITY THAN THAT OF A PRIVATE CITIZEN IN THIS ENDEAVOR. (3) IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ORDINANCE OR CHARTER RESTRICTIONS, THE MUNICIPAL OFFICER MAY MAKE USE OF THE MUNICIPALITY'S VEHICLES AND OTHER EQUIPMENT. SUCH USAGE, HOWEVER, IS SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF 11 O.S. 1976 Supp., 16.4 [11-16.4] (4) A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER, WHILE IN THE EMPLOY OF THE MUNICIPALITY, MAY ASSIST OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN AN INVESTIGATION. (5) A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER IS AN "OFFICER" WITHIN THE MEANING OF 51 O.S. 1971 6 [51-6] (6) A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER MAY NOT BE MADE A DEPUTY SHERIFF WHILE IN THE EMPLOY OF THE MUNICIPALITY UNDER 19 O.S. 1971 542 [19-542], 19 O.S. 1971 545 [19-545] BECAUSE BOTH POSITIONS ARE "OFFICES" WITHIN THE MEANING OF 51 O.S. 1971 6 [51-6] . HOWEVER, A MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER MAY BE DEPUTIZED TO DO A PARTICULAR ACT UNDER 19 O.S. 1971 547 [19-547], 19 O.S. 1971 548 [19-548] CITE: 11 O.S. 1971 574 [11-574], 11 O.S. 1971 575 [11-575], 21 O.S. 1971 99 [21-99], 22 O.S. 1971 196 [22-196], 11 O.S. 1971 20.6 [11-20.6], 19 O.S. 1971 524 [19-524], 22 O.S. 1971 202 [22-202], 11 O.S. 1976 Supp., 16.4 [11-16.4] 74 O.S. 1976 Supp., 150.1 [74-150.1], 74 O.S. 1976 Supp., 105.2 [74-105.2], 74 O.S. 1976 Supp., 150.8 [74-150.8](B) 70 O.S. 1974 Supp., 3311 [70-3311], 19 O.S. 1971 547 [19-547] [19-547], 19 O.S. 1971 545 [19-545], OPINION NO. 73-249, OPINION NO. 76-391, OPINION NO. 75-265, ************** OPINION NO. 75-265, OPINION NO. 63-449 OPINION NO. 74-118 (MICHAEL P. KANE) ** SEE OPINION NO. 90-032 (1991) ** ** SEE OPINION NO. 91-656 (1991) ** SEE OPINION NO. 91-572 (1991) SEE: OPINION NO. 92-522 (1992) == SEE OPINION NO. 88-591 (1988) == ** SEE OPINION NO. 95-048 (1995)