State v. Peña Fuentes
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOwens, J.
¶1 The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to assistance of counsel, which includes the right to confer privately with that counsel. U.S. Const, amend. VI. State intrusion into those private conversations is a blatant violation of a foundational right. We strongly condemn “the odious practice of eavesdropping on privileged communication between attorney and client.” State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371, 378, 382 P.2d 1019 (1963). We presume that such eavesdropping results in prejudice to the defendant and have vacated criminal convictions when there was no way to isolate the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Weatherford v. BurseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- State v. CalleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. CoryWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- State v. MutchWashington Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. StarrishWashington Supreme Court · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- State of Indiana v. Brian J. TaylorIndiana Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Delaware · 2019
- State of Washington v. Daniel BlizzardCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- State Of Washington v. Terrance Jon IrbyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- State v. RobinsIdaho Supreme Court · 2018
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.