State v. Byrd
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
*614Kulik, C.J.
¶1 We recently held in State v. Johnson1 that the controlling principles laid out in the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Arizona v. Gant2 applied to the search of a vehicle incident to arrest but not to the search of a purse incident to arrest. We now conclude that we were wrong. Here, the defendant sat handcuffed in a patrol car while police searched her purse. The trial judge suppressed the drug evidence found in her purse based on Gant. We affirm that decision and the judgment dismissing the prosecution.
FACTS
¶2 Yakima Police Officer Jeff Ely stopped a Honda Civic for…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- New York v. BeltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Arizona v. GantSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- State v. ValdezWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. ValdezWashington Supreme Court · 2009
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. ByrdWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. EllisonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- State v. MacDickenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- Ernest Health, Inc. v. Labor CommissionCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2016
- State Of Washington, V Kassandra Mae JeffersCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.