Facts: The home of Adrian Ibarra-Raya, the brother of petitioner Gilberto Ibarra-Cisneros, was subjected to a warrantless search by police officers that revealed marijuana and resulted in Ibarra-Raya’s arrest. Police officers subsequently used Ibarra-Raya’s cellular phone to arrange a meeting with Ibarra-Cisneros that resulted in his arrest when he was found to be in possession of cocaine. Ibarra-Raya and Ibarra-Cisneros were subsequently convicted in the Superior Court for Walla Walla County of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of cocaine, respectively. Both appealed and the Washington Court of Appeals reversed Ibarra-Raya’s conviction but affirmed Ibarra-Cisneros’s conviction. The Washington Court of Appeals held that while the warrantless search of Ibarra-Raya’s home was unlawful and the evidence derived from it therefore inadmissible, the evidence found in Ibarra-Cisneros’s possession was too attenuated from the search to be subject to the exclusionary rule. Ibarra-Cisneros appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.
Question(s): Is the evidence that was found in Ibarra-Cisneros’s possession too attenuated from the unlawful search of Ibarra-Raya’s home to be subject to the exclusionary rule?
Conclusion: Justice Stephens’ opinion for the Court reversed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that the state failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that the evidence is too attenuated from the unlawful search and that the evidence is therefore subject to the exclusionary rule. Thus, the Court remanded the case to the trial court.
Docket No. 82219-1 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 25735-5)
Petitioner: Gilberto Ibarra-Cisneros
(Counsel: Janelle Carman and C. Dale Slack)
Respondent: State of Washington
(Counsel: Gabriel Eliud Acosta and Teresa Jeanne Chen)
Briefs:
Argument: Tuesday, March 9, 2010 9:00am
[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]
Audio: Washington Supreme Court
Decided: Thursday, October 20th, 2011
Prevailing Party: Gilberto Ibarra-Cisneros (Petitioner)
Vote: 7-2
Citation: Pending
Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-2011)
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Each opinion should appear next to the Justice who authored it.