Washington Supreme Court· 2/27/2014

State v. Hinton

Citations

179 Wash. 2d 862
319 P.3d 9

How courts have described this case

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

noting that the two modes of communication “can involve the same intimate details”
stating article I, section 7 does not \require individuals to veil their affairs in secrecy and avoid sharing information in ways that have become an ordinary part of life\
addressing whether individuals have an expectation of privacy in the content of their text messages under article I, section 7, an issue of first impression, without undertaking a Gunwall analysis
reviewing an individual's privacy expectations in text messages under article I, section 7
holding text messages are \private affairs\
text messages reveal “a ‘wealth of detail about [a person’s] familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.’ ” (alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fairhurst, González, Johnson, Madsen, McCloud, Owens, Stephens, Wiggins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

60 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.