State v. Robinson, 253 P.3d 84

Consolidated cases Millan and Robinson challenge the admissibility of evidence against them after trials concluded pre-Gant.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Gant decision limited automobile searches incident to arrest and was issued during direct review.
Millan's court of appeals concluded error was waived by trial timing; Robinson's court of appeals rejected the search challenge without considering Gant.
Washington Supreme Court held that issue preservation/waiver does not bar first-time appellate challenges when Gant/Patton apply retroactively to cases still on direct review.
The court remanded both cases to the superior court for suppression hearings in light of Gant and its progeny.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May a defendant challenge a search for the first time on appeal after a change in law?	Millan/Robinson	State	Yes; retroactive on direct review.
Are Millan and Robinson entitled to retroactive benefit of Gant and Patton?	Millan/Robinson	State	Yes; retroactive application granted.
Does issue preservation bar first-time appellate challenges under new controlling interpretation?	Millan/Robinson	State	No; preservation rules do not bar given retroactive new rule and completed trials.
Should suppression hearings be held to evaluate the admissibility of evidence under new standard?	Millan/Robinson	State	Remand for suppression hearings ordered.

State v. Patton, 167 Wash.2d 379 (2009) (limits on automobile search incident to arrest under Washington Constitution.)
State v. Stroud, 106 Wash.2d 144 (1986) (precedent on search incident to arrest; signage of concrete rule.)
State v. Ringer, 100 Wash.2d 686 (1983) (Chimel-based scope of search incident to arrest under Washington Constitution.)
State v. McFarland, 127 Wash.2d 322 (1995) (manifest error and waiver principles in appellate review.)
State v. Kirwin, 165 Wash.2d 818 (2009) (manifest constitutional error standard under RAP 2.5(a).)