State v. Hinton, 319 P.3d 9

Hinton challenged a warrantless search of text messages on a cell phone seized from Daniel Lee after Lee’s heroin possession arrest.
Detective Sawyer read text messages on Lee’s iPhone, including one from “Z-Shawn Hinton,” and replied as Lee to arrange a drug deal.
Hinton was charged with attempted possession of heroin based on the text-message communications accessed from Lee’s phone.
The Court of Appeals affirmed suppression denial; the Supreme Court granted review to consider state constitutional privacy protections.
The majority held the text messages were a private affair under article I, section 7 and reversed the conviction.
Concurring and dissenting opinions debated standing and breadth of private-affairs protections in third-party phone contexts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does article I, section 7 protect text messages on another’s phone as a private affair?	Hinton—privacy in his sent messages survives third-party access.	State—privacy interests in text messages are diminished when delivered to third parties.	Yes; private affairs protection applies to text messages on third-party phones.
Does Hinton have standing to challenge the search of Lee’s phone?	Hinton has a personal privacy interest in the text messages he sent.	Hinton lacks ownership/control of Lee’s phone; no standing.	Hinton has standing to challenge the search of Lee’s phone.
Is government deception (posing as Lee) permissible to obtain private text-message content?	Deception intruded on Hinton’s private affairs regardless of aims.	Police deception is often permissible to investigate crime.	Deception does not overcome privacy protections; search invalid without warrant/exception.

City of Ontario v. Quon, 560 U.S. 746 (U.S. 2010) (assumed privacy in text messages but upheld reasonable department review; privacy burden remains under state constitution in some contexts)
State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d 54 (Wash. 1986) (privacy protections extend beyond the Fourth Amendment; strong protection for private communications)
State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506 (Wash. 1984) (privacy rights broadly protect private affairs against government intrusion)
State v. Goucher, 124 Wn.2d 778 (Wash. 1994) (standing and private-affairs analysis for third-party searches; control and disclosure considerations)
State v. Athan, 160 Wn.2d 354 (Wash. 2007) (non-transferable private-rights perspective; permissible police deception considerations)