City of Pasco v. Shaw
Washington Supreme Court
1Concurrence 1
*464¶25
Chambers, J.
(concurring) — I cautiously concur because I do not read the majority as eroding the important principles embodied in article I, section 7 of our constitution and as explained in City of Seattle v. McCready, 123 Wn.2d 260, 270, 868 P.2d 134 (1994). Under our state constitution, “[n]o person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.” Const. art. I, § 7. Article I, section 7 protects “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass’ ” without a warrant…
Also in this document: Concurrence · Alexander.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- State v. BolandWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- City of Seattle v. McCreadyWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. LudvikCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
- State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.