results test in Washington

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2007Then again, in Ferguson v. City of Charleston, 532 U.S. 67 , 121 S.Ct. 1281 , 149 L.Ed.2d 205 (2001), the Court affirmed the limited nature of the special needs doctrine when it struck down a state hospital program that tested pregnant women for drug use and made the results of the test available for police use.

2007Then again, in Ferguson v. City of Charleston, 532 U.S. 67 , 121 S.Ct. 1281 , 149 L.Ed.2d 205 (2001), the Court affirmed the limited nature of the special needs doctrine when it struck down a state hospital program that tested pregnant women for drug use and made the results of the test available for police use.

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant’s refusal, that he is saying, T will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.’ ”), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant's refusal, that he is saying, `I will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.'"), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.App. 519 , 692 P.2d 720 (1984) and superseded by statute as stated in State v. Fish, 115 Or.App. 609 , 839 P.2d 278 (1992), rev'd, 321 Or. 48, 56 , 893 P.2d 1023 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional and reiterating that refused evidence is "testimonial."); Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 412 Mass. 1201, 1211 , 591 N.E.2d 1073 (1992) ("[I]f

1999App. 518, 522 , 684 P.2d 575 (1984) (“Evidence of a defendant’s refusal is relevant in that it shows that he believed that the results of the test would tend to incriminate him and thus shows that he believed that he was guilty.

1999State v. Green, 68 Or.App. 518, 522 , 684 P.2d 575 (1984) ("Evidence of a defendant's refusal is relevant in that it shows that he believed that the results of the test would tend to incriminate him and thus shows that he believed that he was guilty.

1991We hold the State met its burden of establishing the blood sample and the chemicals were free from adulteration by the substances being administered to Curran. [3] Washington law requires the State to show that "the test chemicals and the sample are free from adulteration which could conceivably introduce error into the results of the test." State v. Erdman, 64 Wn.2d 286, 287 , 391 P.2d 518 (1964).

1991We hold the State met its burden of establishing the blood sample and the chemicals were free from adulteration by the substances being administered to Curran. [3] Washington law requires the State to show that "the test chemicals and the sample are free from adulteration which could conceivably introduce error into the results of the test." State v. Erdman, 64 Wn.2d 286, 287 , 391 P.2d 518 (1964).

1965State v. Erdman, 64 Wn.2d 286 , 391 P.2d 518 ; State v. Baker, 56 Wn.2d 846 , 355 P.2d 806 .

1965State v. Erdman, 64 Wn.2d 286 , 391 P.2d 518 ; State v. Baker, 56 Wn.2d 846 , 355 P.2d 806 .

2023Second, he argues that even under the restrictions discussed in Cross, a suppression hearing is part of the circumstances surrounding the plea and, therefore, the results of the hearing remain available for appeal. 156 Wn.2d at 621 . 12 No. 56601-0-II Neither argument is persuasive.

2023To support his first argument that the plea form waivers should be construed in favor of his right to appeal the suppression decision, Johnston cites State v. Bisson, 156 Wn.2d 507, 521-23 , 130 P.3d 820 (2006).

2023To support his first argument that the plea form waivers should be construed in favor of his right to appeal the suppression decision, Johnston cites State v. Bisson, 156 Wn.2d 507, 521-23 , 130 P.3d 820 (2006).

2021Gen., 170 Wn.2d 418 , 439- 40, 241 P.3d 1245 (2010). 61 Br. of Resp’ts Baxter et al. at 8; Br. of Resp’t Western Washington University at 10. 62 CP at 159; WAC 516-26-010. 17 No. 82418-0-I/18 which student violations of the university’s code of conduct qualified under the final results exception, contacted the university’s associate dean, Michael Sledge, who “again reviewed the records to re-verify that the underlying behavior fell for each student at issue . . . within the definitions of a crime of violence or nonforcible sexual offense as set forth in 34 CFR 99.39.”63 After confirming that e

2021Gen., 170 Wn.2d 418 , 439- 40, 241 P.3d 1245 (2010). 61 Br. of Resp’ts Baxter et al. at 8; Br. of Resp’t Western Washington University at 10. 62 CP at 159; WAC 516-26-010. 17 No. 82418-0-I/18 which student violations of the university’s code of conduct qualified under the final results exception, contacted the university’s associate dean, Michael Sledge, who “again reviewed the records to re-verify that the underlying behavior fell for each student at issue . . . within the definitions of a crime of violence or nonforcible sexual offense as set forth in 34 CFR 99.39.”63 After confirming that e

2015Demeanor evidence includes, for example, the admission of evidence concerning a defendant's "slurr[ed] speech," Muniz. 496 U.S. at 592 , "apparent nervousness," United States v. Barbosa, 906 F.2d 1366, 1368 (9th Cir. 1990), or a defendant's demeanor during a polygraph test, even though the results of the test may not be admissible, Rothaeb v. United States. 789 F.2d 647, 651 (8th Cir. 1986).

2015The distinction between permissible evidence of a defendant's demeanor and improper comments on a defendant's silence is helpfully elaborated by the following two cases: Velarde-Gomez. 269 F.3d 1023 , and Michigan v. Rice. 235 Mich. App. 429, 437 , 597 N.W.2d 843 (1999).

2015The distinction between permissible evidence of a defendant's demeanor and improper comments on a defendant's silence is helpfully elaborated by the following two cases: Velarde-Gomez. 269 F.3d 1023 , and Michigan v. Rice. 235 Mich. App. 429, 437 , 597 N.W.2d 843 (1999).

2015The distinction between permissible evidence of a defendant's demeanor and improper comments on a defendant's silence is helpfully elaborated by the following two cases: Velarde-Gomez. 269 F.3d 1023 , and Michigan v. Rice. 235 Mich. App. 429, 437 , 597 N.W.2d 843 (1999).

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

2014During direct examination, the State asked her about Child Protective 9 State v. Perez-Valdez. 172 Wn.2d 808, 818-19 , 265 P.3d 853 (2011). 10 State v. Sutherland, 94 Wn.2d 527, 529 , 617 P.2d 1010 (1980). 11 Id, at 530-31; State v. Descoteaux. 94 Wn.2d 31, 39 , 614 P.2d 179 (1980), overruled on other grounds by State v. Danforth. 97 Wn.2d 255 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982). 12 Terrovona, 105 Wn.2d at 652 . 13 State v. Justesen, 121 Wn.

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant's refusal, that he is saying, `I will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.'"), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.App. 519 , 692 P.2d 720 (1984) and superseded by statute as stated in State v. Fish, 115 Or.App. 609 , 839 P.2d 278 (1992), rev'd, 321 Or. 48, 56 , 893 P.2d 1023 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional and reiterating that refused evidence is "testimonial."); Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 412 Mass. 1201, 1211 , 591 N.E.2d 1073 (1992) ("[I]f

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant's refusal, that he is saying, `I will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.'"), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.App. 519 , 692 P.2d 720 (1984) and superseded by statute as stated in State v. Fish, 115 Or.App. 609 , 839 P.2d 278 (1992), rev'd, 321 Or. 48, 56 , 893 P.2d 1023 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional and reiterating that refused evidence is "testimonial."); Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 412 Mass. 1201, 1211 , 591 N.E.2d 1073 (1992) ("[I]f

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant's refusal, that he is saying, `I will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.'"), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.App. 519 , 692 P.2d 720 (1984) and superseded by statute as stated in State v. Fish, 115 Or.App. 609 , 839 P.2d 278 (1992), rev'd, 321 Or. 48, 56 , 893 P.2d 1023 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional and reiterating that refused evidence is "testimonial."); Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 412 Mass. 1201, 1211 , 591 N.E.2d 1073 (1992) ("[I]f

1999Specifically, the state wants the jury to infer, from the fact of a defendant's refusal, that he is saying, `I will not take the field sobriety tests because I believe I will fail them.'"), overruled on other grounds by State v. Panichello, 71 Or.App. 519 , 692 P.2d 720 (1984) and superseded by statute as stated in State v. Fish, 115 Or.App. 609 , 839 P.2d 278 (1992), rev'd, 321 Or. 48, 56 , 893 P.2d 1023 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional and reiterating that refused evidence is "testimonial."); Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 412 Mass. 1201, 1211 , 591 N.E.2d 1073 (1992) ("[I]f

1995(Instruction 6.) 3 City of Seattle v. Heatley, 70 Wn.

1993If the results of the HIV test of the source is negative, this information may be useful in helping to allay the concerns of the patient. 218 Cal. App.3d at 1266 (quoting Dr. William Drew, M.D.).

1993If the results of the HIV test of the source is negative, this information may be useful in helping to allay the concerns of the patient. 218 Cal. App. 3d at 1266 (quoting Dr. William Drew, M.D.).

1985In Contreras v. Los Angeles, 656 F.2d 1267 (9th Cir. 1981), the court refused to place such a stringent burden on an employer.

1985Thus, if the results of the test do not create a sexually and racially balanced work force, the employer must not utilize the test unless it significantly affects a core purpose of the business. [2] In Contreras v. Los Angeles, 656 F.2d 1267 (9th Cir.1981), the court refused to place such a stringent burden on an employer.

1985The court reasoned that "[d]iscriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress [in enacting Title VII] has proscribed." Contreras, at 1278 (quoting Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 431 , 28 L.Ed.2d 158 , 91 S.Ct. 849 (1971)).

1985The court reasoned that "[d]iscriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress [in enacting Title VII] has proscribed." Contreras, at 1278 (quoting Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 431 , 28 L.Ed.2d 158 , 91 S.Ct. 849 (1971)).

1979In State v. Green, 271 Ore. 153, 167 , 531 P.2d 245 (1975), the issue was what, if any, references to a polygraph examination were proper, where a defendant gave a confession during or following such an examination.

1979In State v. Green, 271 Ore. 153, 167 , 531 P.2d 245 (1975), the issue was what, if any, references to a polygraph examination were proper, where a defendant gave a confession during or following such an examination.