State v. Smith
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRosellini, J.
Petitioner, George Smith, challenges his conviction on four separate counts of delivering a controlled substance. Petitioner urges that he did not receive a fair trial because he was denied access to a confidential informant. The Court of Appeals found error but held that it *38was harmless. We agree with the result reached by the Court of Appeals for the reasons set out below.
I
This case arises from an undercover drug investigation which was assisted by the efforts of two informants. With their help the police eventually arrested 17 persons for delivering controlled substances. Petitioner was…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Washington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Sherman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- State v. HarrisWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. WaggonerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- State v. ThomasWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. ThomasWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- Oloth Insyxiengmay v. Richard MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- State v. LivelyWashington Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. MaupinWashington Supreme Court · 1996
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.