Washington Supreme Court· 7/10/2014

State v. Russell

Citations

180 Wash. 2d 860
330 P.3d 151

How courts have described this case

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

holding that “while the initial protective frisk was permissible, the officer violated Russell’s constitutional rights when he removed a small container from his pocket and searched it without a warrant’’
whether a person consented to a search is a question of fact dependent on the totality of the circumstances
“We would undermine the purposes of Terry and create unjustifiable risks if we hold that an officer in the field must ignore specific facts that indicate potential danger.”
“stop . . . was justified because [the officer] could point to specific and articulable facts that supported a belief that [defendant] could be armed and dangerous’’ (emphasis added)
police officer could point to specific and articulable facts supporting his belief that the suspect was armed and dangerous including the fact that the suspect 4 Emphasis in original. No. 71608-5-1/7 lied about being armed with a handgun when the officer encountered the suspect a week earlier
referring to when an officer feels an item

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.