authority of law inquiry in Washington

9 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2022 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Milesgreen wash · 2007 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 1 sentence 2022Reeder, 184 Wn.2d 817 ; see also State v. Miles, 160 Wn.2d 236, 247 , 156 P.3d 864 (2007).	1	1
State v. Milesgreen wash · 2007 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 1 sentence 2022Reeder, 184 Wn.2d 817 ; see also State v. Miles, 160 Wn.2d 236, 247 , 156 P.3d 864 (2007).	1	1
Carpenter v. United Statesgreen scotus · 2018 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019In addition to misstating Phillip’s reasonable expectation of privacy in his CSLI records, the State also failed to apply for and obtain a warrant based on probable cause The State argues that it was justified in requesting a subpoena using a probable cause standard because the probable cause standard, regardless of what mechanism it is attached to, sufficiently satisfied the authority of law requirement of article I, section 7 Because of the expectation of privacy associated with CSLI records, we disagree The State attempts to distinguish Carpenter by arguing that the Supreme Court did not sa	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Myrick green wash · 1984 2 sentences 2007Carter, 151 Wn.2d at 126 . ¶5 The “private affairs” inquiry focuses on “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant’.” State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)). 2007Carter, 151 Wn.2d at 126 . ¶5 The “private affairs” inquiry focuses on “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant’.” State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)).	2	2007–2007
State v. Ladson green wash · 1999 2 sentences 2007State v. Ladson, 138 Wash.2d 343 , 352 n. 3, 979 P.2d 833 (1999) (citing In re Pers. 2007State v. Ladson, 138 Wn.2d 343 , 352 n.3, 979 P.2d 833 (1999) (quoting Ire re Pers.	2	2007–2007
State v. Carter green wash · 2004 2 sentences 2007Carter, 151 Wash.2d at 126 , 85 P.3d 887 . ¶ 5 The "private affairs" inquiry focuses on "`those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant.'" State v. Young, 123 Wash.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wash.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)). 2007Carter, 151 Wn.2d at 126 . ¶5 The “private affairs” inquiry focuses on “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant’.” State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)).	2	2007–2007
State v. Ladson green wash · 1999 2 sentences 2007State v. Ladson, 138 Wash.2d 343 , 352 n. 3, 979 P.2d 833 (1999) (citing In re Pers. 2007State v. Ladson, 138 Wn.2d 343 , 352 n.3, 979 P.2d 833 (1999) (quoting Ire re Pers.	2	2007–2007
State v. Young green · 1994 2 sentences 2007Carter, 151 Wn.2d at 126 . ¶5 The “private affairs” inquiry focuses on “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant’.” State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)). 2007Carter, 151 Wn.2d at 126 . ¶5 The “private affairs” inquiry focuses on “ ‘those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant’.” State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)).	2	2007–2007
State v. Garcia-Salgado green wash · 2010 1 sentence 2019Garcia-Salciado, 170 Wn.2d at 186 .	1	2019–2019
State v. Hampton neutral washctapp · 2002 1 sentence 2018State v. Hampton, 114 Wn.	1	2018–2018
State v. Neslund green wash · 1984 1 sentence 2015Neslund, 103 Wn.2d at 88 ; RCW 10.27.020(7). ¶28 Amicus curiae Washington State Attorney General’s Office notes that the court in Miles identified a warrant or a subpoena as two separate procedures to satisfy the authority of law requirement, demonstrating that either are sufficient.	1	2015–2015
State v. Carter green wash · 2004 1 sentence 2007Carter, 151 Wash.2d at 126 , 85 P.3d 887 . ¶ 5 The "private affairs" inquiry focuses on "`those privacy interests which citizens of this state have held, and should be entitled to hold, safe from governmental trespass absent a warrant.'" State v. Young, 123 Wash.2d 173, 181 , 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (quoting State v. Myrick, 102 Wash.2d 506, 511 , 688 P.2d 151 (1984)).	1	2007–2007

Statutes the citing opinions construe

WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 21.20.370 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check