State v. Doughty
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.
¶1 The defendant here appeals the trial court’s refusal to suppress drug evidence seized after he visited a drug house at 3:20 a.m. for a two-minute-long visit. We conclude that the circumstances provided ample grounds for a Terry1 stop and affirm the trial judge’s refusal to suppress the drug evidence.
FACTS
¶2 Officer Derek Bishop was watching a particular house for drug activity because informants identified it as a drug *587house. At 3:20 a.m., Officer Bishop saw a car park in front of the house. The driver, Walter Doughty, entered the house and returned to his car in less than two minutes. Mr.…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. HillWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. LadsonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. LadsonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. KennedyWashington Supreme Court · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. DoughtyWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. DoughtyWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. MarcumCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- State v. KellyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011