State v. Reichert
242 P.3d 44
| Wash. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Reichert on probation under DOC supervision; he had reported his residence to DOC.
- Detectives received a tip Reichert was selling marijuana and living at a different Sunde Road residence.
- DOC Officer Valley confirmed Reichert under supervision, provided addresses, but detectives could not locate him.
- Informant later directed detectives to the Sunde Road residence where Reichert’s vehicle was parked.
- Detectives asked Valley to accompany them for a compliance check at the Sunde Road residence for safety and supervision.
- Valley identified Reichert, handcuffed him, searched him, and opened the door to the residence; odor of marijuana was detected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether detectives acted as pretext to evade warrants | Reichert contends Valley used detectives to aid a criminal investigation rather than probation supervision. | Valley argues involvement was for officer safety and proper DOC supervision, not pretext. | Not a pretext; conduct aligned with probation supervision purposes. |
| What Fourth Amendment standard applies to probation searches in this context | Reichert relies on pre-Winterstein reasonable suspicion standard for probation searches. | Valley and the state urge the standard discussed in Winterstein for probable cause. | Remand to apply Winterstein's probable-cause standard for residence search. |
| Whether there was probable cause to search the residence | Probable cause existed based on informant tips and Reichert’s residence inconsistencies. | Probable cause needed to be adjudicated; not resolved on record. | Remand for suppression hearing to determine if probable cause existed. |
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict for possession with intent to deliver | Evidence showed constructive possession and intent based on packaging, paraphernalia, and control of the premises. | Argues lack of direct intent evidence beyond possession. | Sufficient evidence supported construct possession and intent to deliver; reversed for remand only on search issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (2001) (probationary searches need only reasonable suspicion; purpose not dispositive)
- Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987) (special need to supervise probation justifies warrantless searches)
- State v. Winterstein, 167 Wash.2d 620 (2009) (CCO must have probable cause to search residence; remand for hearing)
- United States v. Conway, 122 F.3d 841 (9th Cir. 1997) (RCW 9.94A.631 upheld as reasonable under Fourth Amendment)