State v. Rose
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtBridgewater, J.
¶1 Amber Dee Rose, Danielle Wilson, and Kevin Wentz appeal the trial court’s decision in their respective cases to impose weekly urinalysis (UA) as part of Mason County’s standard condition of pretrial release. We consolidated review of these three cases. We hold that because a UA is a warrantless search and there is not any evidence that a weekly UA would increase the likelihood of appearance, the imposition of a UA as a standard condition of pretrial release is inappropriate. We reverse and remand with instructions to remove the weekly UA requirements for all three; and because Wentz’s case…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. LadsonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. LadsonWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. RankinWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. RankinWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- United States v. Raymond Lee ScottCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- State v. CollinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- State Of Washington, V Quran D. A. IngramCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
- State Of Washington v. Brittanie OlsenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- Blomstrom v. TrippWashington Supreme Court · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.