Washington Supreme Court· 12/3/2009
State v. Winterstein
Citations
- 167 Wash. 2d 620
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding probation officers must have probable cause before performing a war-rantless search
- developing rule under article I, section 7 to protect privacy interests of third parties
- When evaluating a warrant based, in part, on information learned in a warrantless search, the tainted information must be excluded.
- inevitable discovery doctrine incompatible with article I, section 7
- rejecting the inevitable discovery doctrine
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Alexander, Chambers, Fairhurst, Johnson, Madsen, Owens, Sanders, Stephens
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
58 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. GregoryWashington Supreme Court· 2018-10-11· cited 205×
- State of Iowa v. Justin Dean ShortSupreme Court of Iowa· 2014-07-18· cited 153×
- State v. WintersteinWashington Supreme Court· 2009-12-03· cited 150×
- State v. AfanaWashington Supreme Court· 2010-07-01· cited 126×
- State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2010-01-07· cited 57×
- State v. CornwellWashington Supreme Court· 2018-03-15· cited 55×
- State v. Garcia-SalgadoWashington Supreme Court· 2010-10-07· cited 54×
- State v. AbuanCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2011-04-12· cited 52×
- State v. MuhammadWashington Supreme Court· 2019-11-07· cited 52×
- State v. BetancourthWashington Supreme Court· 2018-03-22· cited 51×
- In re the Personal Restraint of HaghighiWashington Supreme Court· 2013-09-12· cited 47×
- State v. ReichertCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2010-11-02· cited 45×
- State v. EserjoseWashington Supreme Court· 2011-06-30· cited 43×
- State v. MayfieldWashington Supreme Court· 2019-02-07· cited 42×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 2013-06-06· cited 41×
- State v. KippWashington Supreme Court· 2014-02-06· cited 40×
- State v. SamaliaWashington Supreme Court· 2016-07-28· cited 36×
- State Of Washington, Res/cross-app. v. George Donald Hatt, Jr., App/cross-res.Court of Appeals of Washington· 2019-11-18· cited 31×
- State v. MechamWashington Supreme Court· 2016-06-16· cited 27×
- State Of Washington, V. Timothy Forrest BassCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2021-08-16· cited 26×
Cites
29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 37,942×
- Brinegar v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1949-10-10· cited 6,013×
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1984-06-11· cited 3,080×
- State v. HendricksonWashington Supreme Court· 1996-05-09· cited 744×
- State v. HillWashington Supreme Court· 1994-03-17· cited 742×
- State v. O'NeillWashington Supreme Court· 2003-01-30· cited 427×
- State v. LadsonWashington Supreme Court· 1999-07-01· cited 415×
- State v. WhiteWashington Supreme Court· 1982-02-18· cited 340×
- State v. BolandWashington Supreme Court· 1990-11-15· cited 249×
- State v. HouserWashington Supreme Court· 1980-12-31· cited 235×
- State v. DuncanWashington Supreme Court· 2002-04-11· cited 196×
- Motley v. ParksNinth Circuit· 2005-12-29· cited 186×
- State v. BondsWashington Supreme Court· 1982-11-10· cited 163×
- State v. GainesWashington Supreme Court· 2005-07-28· cited 143×
- State v. WarnerWashington Supreme Court· 1995-02-23· cited 107×
- State v. CoatesWashington Supreme Court· 1987-04-02· cited 99×
- State v. MorseWashington Supreme Court· 2005-12-01· cited 94×
- Matter of MaxfieldWashington Supreme Court· 1997-10-16· cited 89×
- In re the Personal Restraint of MaxfieldWashington Supreme Court· 1997-10-16· cited 69×
- State v. HatchieWashington Supreme Court· 2007-09-06· cited 47×
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.