Facts: Petitioner Anthony Erickson was arrested after he did not appear at a hearing to determine whether Erickson had violated the terms of his probation by failing to report to his probation officer, failing to notify the court of a change of address, and by failing to enroll in substance abuse treatment. After a search revealed that Erickson was in possession of cocaine, he was charged with and convicted of possession of a controlled substance in the Superior Court for Snohomish County. Erickson subsequently appealed his conviction, asserting that the arrest and resulting search that had revealed the cocaine lacked probable cause insofar as the court that had issued the arrest warrant never made a formal finding of probable cause with regard to the allegations that Erickson had violated the terms of his probation. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Erickson’s conviction, holding that merely a well-founded suspicion of a probation violation was necessary due to the diminished expectation of privacy that an individual on probation has. Erickson appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Is probable cause required in order to issue a warrant for the arrest of an individual on conditional release?

Conclusion: Justice Chambers’ opinion for a unanimous Court ruled that Erickson’s arrest and search were not prohibited by the 4^th Amendment to the United States Constitution insofar as the court issuing the warrant was not required to establish probable cause with regard to Erickson’s alleged violation of his probation. As Erickson’s liberty was already restricted and subject to meeting the requirements imposed by the court at the time the warrant was issued due to his previous arrest and conviction for assault, the Court concluded that a well-founded suspicion was sufficient to satisfy the 4^th Amendment’s requirement that an arrest be reasonable and that such a suspicion existed due to Erickson’s failure to notify the court of his new address. Thus, the Court affirmed Erickson’s conviction.

Docket No. 81594-1 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 59468-1)

Petitioner: Anthony Erickson

(Counsel: Oliver Ross Davis)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: Mary Kathleen Webber)

Briefs:

Argument: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 10:00am

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, January 21st, 2010

Prevailing Party: State of Washington (Respondent)

Vote: 9-0

Citation: Pending

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Sanders

Chambers
(Majority)

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens