Washington Supreme Court· 6/4/1992

State v. Hastings

Citations

830 P.2d 658
119 Wash. 2d 229
1992 Wash. LEXIS 155
1992 WL 117163

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

using a home as a center for transacting unlawful business with the public is not a \private affair\ protected by Const, art. 1, § 7
finding no violation of private affairs because “[t]he decision to allow strangers to enter was made absent coercion by the police and with full knowledge of the illegal activity occurring within”
finding no violation of private affairs because \the decision to allow strangers to enter was made absent coercion by the police and with full knowledge of the illegal activity occurring within\
“Consent must be voluntary, but this does not mean that it must be made with full knowledge of the right to refuse the entry or search.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Durham, Utter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.