Tomorrow, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in two related cases, Riley v. California, and United States v. Wurie , that will decide an issue of vital importance to anyone who owns a cell phone who values their privacy. The court will decide whether the police can both seize a cell phone when its owner is arrested, and search its contents, all without seeking a search warrant.
The answer to this question used to be an easy, "Yes!" But a recent Washington Court of Appeals decision tells us that drivers who refuse to perform "voluntary" roadside tests at the request of an officer will find the exercise of their rights will be used against them in court in a prosecution for DUI.
In the wake of news that the first recreational marijuana licenses had been granted, and before the upcoming lottery for retail licenses, come two important Court of Appeals decisions interpreting the medical marijuana laws (MUCA, short for Medical Use of Cannabis Act, RCW 69.51A).
The Washington Liquor Control Board has indicated that a lottery will take place soon to decide who will get the 334 licenses to open retail marijuana stores in Washington.
In the age of Facebook, where people post the most interesting (and potentially embarrassing) things about themselves, are people really concerned about their right to privacy? In Washington, our state constitution has a very explicit protection of the right to privacy: