Legal Opinion

State v. Costello

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 21, 1996No. 14319-8-IIIPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchultheis, J.

During a drug buy, an undercover police officer wore a body wire authorized for officer safety *152pursuant to RCW 9.73.210.1 The subsequent drug transaction led to Marc Costello’s conviction for delivery of a controlled substance. On appeal, he contends the authorization for the body wire was deficient and that all information obtained during the buy, including the participating officer’s visual observations, should have been suppressed. We affirm.

The relevant facts are not disputed. On March 1, 1994, Detective Rob Linman and another police officer asked Lieutenant Randy Carper to sign an…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. FjermestadWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. SalinasWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. JimenezWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State v. JimenezWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. JimenezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1995

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997
  2. State of Washington v. Scott Eugene RidgleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API