Summary
adopting the reasoning of the dissent in State v. Ryland, 65 Wn. App. 806, 810, 829 P.2d 806
Summary of this case from State v. MorseOpinion
No. 59466-0.
November 25, 1992.
Nature of Action: Prosecution for second degree burglary.
Superior Court: The Superior Court for King County, No. 89-1-04666-7, Lloyd W. Bever, J., on November 6, 1991, entered a judgment on a verdict of guilty. Court of Appeals: The court at 65 Wn. App. 806 reversed the judgment, holding that a houseguest's consent to the warrantless entry of the arresting officer into the defendant's residence was invalid.
Supreme Court: Adopting the reasoning of the Court of Appeals dissenting opinion, the court reverses the decision of the Court of Appeals and remands the case to the trial court to determine whether the arresting officer reasonably believed that the houseguest had authority to consent to the entry. Thereafter, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings.
Andrew P. Zinner of Washington Appellate Defender Association, for appellant.
Norm Maleng, Prosecuting Attorney, and Theresa Fricke, Senior Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent.
A Department of this court unanimously adopts the reasoning of the dissent in State v. Ryland, 65 Wn. App. 806, 810, 829 P.2d 806 (1992) (Agid, J., dissenting). Accordingly, the case is remanded to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether the police officer reasonably believed the houseguest had authority to consent to entry. The case is thereafter remanded to the Court of Appeals, Division One, for resolution.
Reconsideration denied December 30, 1992.