State v. Woo, Nos. 43097
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Washington |
| Writing for the Court | STAFFORD; HALE |
| Citation | 84 Wn.2d 472,527 P.2d 271 |
| Parties | The STATE of Washington, Petitioner, v. Danny WOO and Donald G. Louie, Respondents. |
| Docket Number | Nos. 43097,43098 |
| Decision Date | 17 October 1974 |
Page 472
v.
Danny WOO and Donald G. Louie, Respondents.
[527 P.2d 272] Christopher T. Bayley, Pros. Atty., Frederick L. Yeatts, Gerald M. Lorentson, Seattle, for petitioner.
Walthew, Warner, Keefe, Arron, Costello & Thompson, Thomas P. Keefe, Seattle, for respondents.
STAFFORD, Associate Justice.
The respondents (hereinafter defendants) were charged separately with multiple counts of bribing a public officer. At separate omnibus hearings, held pursuant to CrR 4.5, counsel for each defendant proposed stipulations for polygraph examination that generally provided for: (1) Court appointment of a 'qualified' impartial polygraph operator; (2) a member of the prosecuting attorney's staff, the defendant's attorney, and a designated judge of the Superior Court to agree upon and draft questions to be propounded to the defendant by the polygraph operator; and (3) the recorded polygraph readings, and opinion of the polygraph operator based thereon, to be admissible in evidence at the discretion of the trial judge.
The state refused to stipulate, and the defendants brought the matter on by separate motions.
Despite the lack of stipulation, the defendants' motions were granted over the state's objection. In addition, the omnibus hearing judge ordered the state to pay half the
Page 473
cost of each polygraph examination. The orders of the omnibus hearing judge are before us on separate writs of certiorari, consolidated for review. There being no adequate support in the record for the orders, we reverse.The general rule, followed almost without exception since Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir. 1923), is that the results of a polygraph examination are inadmissible at trial. Courts in several jurisdictions have, however, found such results admissible upon Stipulation by both the defense and the prosecution. State v. Ross, 7 Wash.App. 62, 497 P.2d 1343 (1972); State v. Valdez, 91 Ariz. 274, 371 P.2d 894 (1962); State v. Fields, 434 S.W.2d 507 (Mo.1968); People v. Zazzetta, 27 Ill.2d 302, 189 N.E.2d 260 (1963); State v. Stanislawski, 62 Wis.2d 730, 216 N.W.2d 8 (1974). Nevertheless, the latter cases are of little assistance, there being no stipulation in the instant case.
Defendants have asked us to decide whether polygraph tests administered pursuant to stipulation are admissible at trial. There being no stipulation,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Detention of Halgren, No. 76161-2.
...in the relevant scientific community. Frye was implicitly adopted by this court for the first time in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 3. Dr. Wheeler described "paraphilia" as the "definitional word for a type of sexual deviance which involves repetitive, intense sexual urges, fan......
-
State v. Copeland, No. 62417-8
...113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). This court implicitly adopted the Frye standard for admissibility in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), and explicitly approved it in State v. Canaday, 90 Wash.2d 808, 585 P.2d 1185 (1978). The rationale of the Frye standard, which req......
-
State v. Grisby, Nos. 45750-6
...94 Wash.2d 31, 614 P.2d 179 (1980). See State v. Renfro, 96 Wash.2d 902, 639 P.2d 737 (1982). In State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 475, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), the court stated that if it were "furnished with a record sufficiently adequate to permit review of the subject", it might consider a depa......
-
City of Fircrest v. Jensen, No. 76738-6.
...6. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir. 1923). This standard was adopted implicitly in Washington in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), and explicitly in State v. Canaday, 90 Wash.2d 808, 585 P.2d 1185 OWENS, J. (concurring). ¶ 25 I concur in the majority's rejection......
-
In re Detention of Halgren, No. 76161-2.
...in the relevant scientific community. Frye was implicitly adopted by this court for the first time in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 3. Dr. Wheeler described "paraphilia" as the "definitional word for a type of sexual deviance which involves repetitive, intense sexual urges, fan......
-
State v. Copeland, No. 62417-8
...113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). This court implicitly adopted the Frye standard for admissibility in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), and explicitly approved it in State v. Canaday, 90 Wash.2d 808, 585 P.2d 1185 (1978). The rationale of the Frye standard, which req......
-
State v. Grisby, Nos. 45750-6
...94 Wash.2d 31, 614 P.2d 179 (1980). See State v. Renfro, 96 Wash.2d 902, 639 P.2d 737 (1982). In State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 475, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), the court stated that if it were "furnished with a record sufficiently adequate to permit review of the subject", it might consider a depa......
-
City of Fircrest v. Jensen, No. 76738-6.
...6. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir. 1923). This standard was adopted implicitly in Washington in State v. Woo, 84 Wash.2d 472, 527 P.2d 271 (1974), and explicitly in State v. Canaday, 90 Wash.2d 808, 585 P.2d 1185 OWENS, J. (concurring). ¶ 25 I concur in the majority's rejection......