Ferrier warning in Washington

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2023The Supreme Court has since “clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search . . . .” State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003).

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2023The Supreme Court has since “clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search . . . .” State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003).

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2020Ferrier warnings are only required when police “seek to conduct a search for contraband or evidence of a crime without obtaining a search warrant.” State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000); see also State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 566 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003).

2025In our analysis, we again focused on the purpose of the visit and stated that Ferrier warnings “apply when police conduct a ‘knock and talk.’” Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 206 .

2025In our analysis, we again focused on the purpose of the visit and stated that Ferrier warnings “apply when police conduct a ‘knock and talk.’” Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 206 .

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2020Ferrier warnings are only required when police “seek to conduct a search for contraband or evidence of a crime without obtaining a search warrant.” State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000); see also State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 566 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003).

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2016See Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 206 ; State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999). ¶13 Specifically, officers must give the resident the “Ferrier warnings.” Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 205 .

2016Subsequent cases have "clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search." State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (citing State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000)); see also State v. Ruem, 179 Wn.2d 195, 205 , 313 P.3d 1156 (2013); State v. Vy Thang, 145 Wn.2d 630, 637 , 41 P.3d 1159 (2002).

2016Subsequent cases have “clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search.” State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (citing State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000)); see also State v. Ruem, 179 Wn.2d 195, 205 , 313 P3d 1156 (2013) (plurality opinion); State v. Vy Thang, 145 Wn.2d 630, 637 , 41 P.3d 1159 (2002). ¶36 We have declined to adopt a bright-line rule requiring Ferrier warnings in every instance when the police enter someone’s h

2014App. 489, 505-06 , 17 P.3d 3 (2001) (.Ferrier warnings not necessary when officers went to house with probable cause to arrest suspect); State v. Leupp, 96 Wn.

2014App. 324, 333-34 , 980 P.2d 765 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not applicable when police officers arrived at a residence in response to a 911 call), review denied, 139 Wn.2d 1018 (2000). ¶10 This history of Ferrier application strongly suggests that the case addresses only a segment of house-related searches.

2016Subsequent cases have "clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search." State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (citing State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000)); see also State v. Ruem, 179 Wn.2d 195, 205 , 313 P.3d 1156 (2013); State v. Vy Thang, 145 Wn.2d 630, 637 , 41 P.3d 1159 (2002).

2016Subsequent cases have “clarified that the Ferrier requirement is limited to situations where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search.” State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (citing State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 28 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000)); see also State v. Ruem, 179 Wn.2d 195, 205 , 313 P3d 1156 (2013) (plurality opinion); State v. Vy Thang, 145 Wn.2d 630, 637 , 41 P.3d 1159 (2002). ¶36 We have declined to adopt a bright-line rule requiring Ferrier warnings in every instance when the police enter someone’s h

2025App. 859, 864 , 339 P.3d 992 (2014) (“The cited history of Ferrier and our court’s treatment of the home as most deserving of heightened protection under our constitution leads us to conclude that Ferrier warnings need not be given prior to obtaining consent to search a vehicle”); State v. Tagas, 121 Wn.

2023App. at 878 (police officer’s failure to give Ferrier warnings before searching the defendant’s purse did not invalidate the 11 No. 84469-5-I/12 defendant’s consent); State v. Witherrite, 184 Wn.

2016To the extent that the question of whether or not Ferrier warnings were, in fact, provided constitutes a "determinative factual matter[]," id., for which the trial court's findings were not sufficiently specific, I agree with Judge Korsmo that "[w]hen the findings are not 14               State v. Budd, No. 91529-6 (Yu, J., Dissenting) clear or fail to address an important point, the remedy is to remand for better findings," Budd, 186 Wn.

2016To the extent that the question of whether or not Ferrier warnings were, in fact, provided constitutes a “determinative factual matter! ],” id,., for which the trial court’s findings were not sufficiently specific, I agree with Judge Korsmo that “[w]hen the findings are not clear or fail to address an important point, the remedy is to remand for better findings,” Budd, 186 Wn.

2022The defendant sought to suppress the evidence because the resident did not give informed consent to the search of her home, but the court held 3 State v. Ferrier, 136 Wn.2d 103 , 960 P.2d 927 (1998). 12 No. 37375-4-III State v. Thompson that “Ferrier warnings were not required because the officers did not enter for the purpose of obtaining consent to a warrantless search.” Id. at 566-67.

2019He and Detective Fryberg confirmed that Detective Tilleson first obtained Lee's consent to search the purse, gave 2Report of Proceedings(RP)(Oct. 6, 2016) at 31. 3 136 Wn.2d 103 , 960 P.2d 927 (1998). 4 Both detectives testified that Detective Tilleson provided Ferrier warnings, and that Lee never revoked her consent or asked the officer to stop or to limit the scope of the search. 5 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 10 Ohio Misc. 9 (1966). 6 RP (Oct. 6, 2016) at 105. 7 Id. at 110. 3 No. 77038-1-1/4 Ferrier warnings, and then Lee disclosed there were narcotics in the purse.

2023See State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 565-67 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003) (Ferrier warnings are required only when police seek entry into a home to conduct a consensual search for contraband or evidence of a crime, not “merely to question or gain information from an occupant”); State v. Williams, 142 Wn.2d 17, 27-28, 19-20 , 11 P.3d 714 (2000) (Ferrier warnings not required when police requested consent to enter a tenant’s home to arrest the tenant’s visitor, who had a valid arrest warrant); State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980-81 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999) (Ferrier warnings not required when

2016See Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 206 ; State v. Bustamante-Davila, 138 Wn.2d 964, 980 , 983 P.2d 590 (1999). ¶13 Specifically, officers must give the resident the “Ferrier warnings.” Ruem, 179 Wn.2d at 205 .

2019Because we have already held that warning a person of the right to refuse consent is insufficient to satisfy the broad federal attenuation doctrine, we easily conclude that it is insufficient to satisfy our narrow ^ Ferrier warnings are required only "where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search." State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003). ^ Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L.

2019Because we have already held that warning a person of the right to refuse consent is insufficient to satisfy the broad federal attenuation doctrine, we easily conclude that it is insufficient to satisfy our narrow ^ Ferrier warnings are required only "where police request entry into a home for the purpose of obtaining consent to conduct a warrantless search." State v. Khounvichai, 149 Wn.2d 557, 563 , 69 P.3d 862 (2003). ^ Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L.

2016See State v. Armenta, 134 Wn.2d 1, 14 , 948 P.2d 1280 (1997) ("In the absence of a finding on a factual issue we must indulge the presumption that the party with the burden of proof failed to sustain their burden on [that] issue."). 3 Given Detective Holmes's testimony, the trial court could have decided either way whether the officers gave Budd the Ferrier warnings before entering his home.

2016See State v. Armenta, 134 Wn.2d 1, 14 , 948 P.2d 1280 (1997) ("In the absence of a finding on a factual issue we must indulge the presumption that the party with the burden of proof failed to sustain their burden on [that] issue."). 3 Given Detective Holmes's testimony, the trial court could have decided either way whether the officers gave Budd the Ferrier warnings before entering his home.

2025Although this court has consistently confined Ferrier warnings to knock and talk procedures, Budd, 185 Wn.2d at 573 , the petition in this case only 1 RCW 10.79.040 has been amended to read, in per�nent part, “It shall be unlawful for any police officer or other peace officer to enter and search any private dwelling house or place of residence without the authority of a search warrant issued upon a complaint as by law provided.” LAWS OF 2010, ch. 8, § 1062. 2 State v. Mercedes, No. 102622-6 (Melnick, J.P.T., concurring) sought review, and we only granted review, on the issue of whether Ferrier war

2025Although this court has consistently confined Ferrier warnings to knock and talk procedures, Budd, 185 Wn.2d at 573 , the petition in this case only 1 RCW 10.79.040 has been amended to read, in per�nent part, “It shall be unlawful for any police officer or other peace officer to enter and search any private dwelling house or place of residence without the authority of a search warrant issued upon a complaint as by law provided.” LAWS OF 2010, ch. 8, § 1062. 2 State v. Mercedes, No. 102622-6 (Melnick, J.P.T., concurring) sought review, and we only granted review, on the issue of whether Ferrier war