State v. Spencer
| Decision Date | 08 June 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 674--III,674--III |
| Citation | 510 P.2d 833,9 Wn.App. 95 |
| Parties | STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Gordon Thomas SPENCER, Appellant. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
Cameron K. Hopkins, Porter & Hopkins, Yakima, for appellant.
Joseph Panattoni, Pros. Atty., David H. Gorrie, Deputy Pros. Atty., Ellensburg, for respondent.
Defendant, Gordon T. Spencer, was charged and convicted by a jury of four counts of sale and four counts of possession of illegal drugs in violation of the Uniform Controlled Substance Act. He appeals.
One basic issue is presented: Did the court err in denying a motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search of the defendant's room pursuant to a search warrant?
On March 9, 1972, Lt. Tom Pratt of the Ellensburg Police Department arrested the defendant, based upon an information charging him with four counts of selling amphetamine tablets between December 16, 1971 and January 7, 1972. Following defendant's arrest, Lt. Pratt and another officer searched the residence of defendant pursuant to a search warrant issued March 9, 1972. This search was not incident to the defendant's arrest; it was accomplished at both a time and place removed from his arrest. As a result of the search, amphetamine tablets, lysergic acid, diethylamide and marijuana were found. Thereafter, the information was amended to charge the defendant with four additional counts of possession of illegal drugs.
Defendant contends the affidavit in support of the search warrant did not contain sufficient information to establish probable cause; therefore, the search warrant was improperly issued and the items secured as a result of the search should have been suppressed. We agree.
The affidavit supporting the issuance of the search warrant executed by Lt. Pratt, in pertinent part, states:
Affiant states that he has probable cause to believe, based upon the following facts, that the above listed things to be seized are now located upon the (person and) premises set forth above:
On March 9, 1972 a warrant bearing number C 7103 was issued by the Superior Court of Kittitas County. Such warrant charges the said GORDON T. SPENCER with the crime of Illegal Sales of Uniform Controlled Substance.
On 12--23--72 a sale of a Uniform Controlled Substance was made by GORDON T. SPENCER at 814 E. 5th Avenue, Ellensburg, Wash. On January 7, 1972 another such sale was made at the same address.
It has been determined that GORDON T. SPENCER is residing at the address with other persons. This premise is a single unit dwelling house. It is the writers opinion that GORDON T. SPENCER does possess amphetamines, the substance sold in the previously mentioned contacts, and that the amphetamine (sic) are in fact stored within the described dwelling house.
The above described vehicle has been identified as the vehicle owned by SPENCER. It is known that he regualrly (sic) operates this vehicle. It is therefore the writers opinion that amphetamines may be stored within the vehicle.
An affidavit supporting a search warrant must be sufficiently comprehensive to provide the issuing magistrate with facts from which he can independently conclude there is probable cause to believe the items sought are at the location to be searched. State v. Withers, 8 Wash.App. 123, 504 P.2d 1151 (1972); State v. Portrey, 6 Wash.App. 380, 492 P.2d 1050 (1972); United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971). Further, these facts must be current facts, not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rockhold
...v. Shaw, 444 Pa. 110, 281 A.2d 897, 899 (1971); Stovall v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 67, 189 N.W.2d 353, 356 (1972); State v. Spencer, 9 Wash.App. 95, 510 P.2d 833, 834 (1973), and citations; 3 Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 662, n. 30 at 23; 68 Am.Jur.2d, Searches and Seizures, § 70......
-
State v. Amezcua, No. 22239-0-III (WA 10/26/2004)
...can undertake a detached and independent evaluation. State v. Thein, 138 Wn.2d 133, 140, 977 P.2d 582 (1999); State v. Spencer, 9 Wn. App. 95, 96-97, 510 P.2d 833 (1973). Probable cause for a search warrant means simply the probability of criminal activity, not a prima facie case. State v. ......
-
State v. Johnson
...287 U.S. 206, 210, 53 S.Ct. 138, 77 L.Ed. 260 (1932); State v. Clay, 7 Wash.App. 631, 638, 501 P.2d 603 (1972); State v. Spencer, 9 Wash.App. 95, 99, 510 P.2d 833 (1973).7 Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 413, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); White, J., concurring; United States......
-
State v. Plumley
...a detached and independent evaluation of the evidence by the issuing magistrate. Thein, 138 Wn.2d at 140; State v. Spencer, 9 Wn. App. 95, 96-97, 510 P.2d 833 (1973). To be sufficient, the search warrant affidavit must 'recite specific data as to times, places and magnitude of previous crim......