<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jennifer M. Cooper &#187; &#187; search &amp; seizure</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jennifermcooper.com/tag/search-seizure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com</link>
	<description>Innovative Legal Education In Academic Success &#38; Legal Writing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2026 18:36:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.42</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Pat-down frisks must be supported by objectively reasonable facts that suspect is armed and presently dangerous</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/15/pat-down-frisks-must-be-supported-by-objectively-reasonable-facts-that-suspect-armed-presently-dangerous/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/15/pat-down-frisks-must-be-supported-by-objectively-reasonable-facts-that-suspect-armed-presently-dangerous/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:11:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frisking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pat-down frisk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search incident to arrest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State v. Bee Xiong]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=23</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Bee Xiong, Washington Supreme Court, filed September 11, 2008. Police went to Kheng Xiong&#8217;s residence with a warrant for his arrest and a black &#38; white picture of Kheng Xiong to assist in identifying him. Officers observed a minivan pull up to the residence and believed the passenger was Kheng Xiong, although he [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/15/pat-down-frisks-must-be-supported-by-objectively-reasonable-facts-that-suspect-armed-presently-dangerous/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Urinalysis is warrantess search; Mandatory urine testing as condition of pretrial release is inappropriate as there is no evidence that it increases likelihood of appearance for court</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/02/urinalysis-is-warrantess-search-inappropriate-condition-of-pretrial-release/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/02/urinalysis-is-warrantess-search-inappropriate-condition-of-pretrial-release/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conditions of release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug charge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State v. Rose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UA's]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=21</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Rose, Court of Appeals Division II, filed August 26, 2008. Ms. Rose was arraigned on drug charges relating to a marijuana grow operation. Ms. Rose&#8217;s only criminal history was a conviction for driving with a suspended license from 1989. She had no history of failing to appear for court and she had a [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/09/02/urinalysis-is-warrantess-search-inappropriate-condition-of-pretrial-release/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is our exclusionary rule in jeopardy?</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/18/is-our-exclusionary-rule-in-jeopardy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/18/is-our-exclusionary-rule-in-jeopardy/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:22:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exclusionary rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mapp v. Ohio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=19</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a series titled &#8220;American Exception&#8221; The New York Times examines the American exclusionary rule in &#8220;Should Suspects Go Free When Police Blunder?&#8221; The exclusionary rule was originally outlined by the United States Supreme Court in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) and mandates suppression of evidence in certain instances when police violate a [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/18/is-our-exclusionary-rule-in-jeopardy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Smell of marijuana in general area is insufficient for probable cause to arrest</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/17/smell-of-marijuana-in-general-area-is-insuffiicent-for-probable-cause-to-arrest/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/17/smell-of-marijuana-in-general-area-is-insuffiicent-for-probable-cause-to-arrest/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[odor of marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[possession of marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[probable cause to arrest odor of marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State v. Grande]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ybarra v. Illinois]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=18</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Grande, Washington Supreme Court, filed July 17, 2008. Mr. Grande was a passenger in a vehicle stopped for having very dark tinted windows. When the officer pulled the vehicle over, he detected the moderate smell of marijuana coming from the car. He arrested both the driver and Mr. Grande, the passenger. He handcuffed [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/17/smell-of-marijuana-in-general-area-is-insuffiicent-for-probable-cause-to-arrest/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Warrantless search of dorm hallway unlawful absent consent; residents have reasonable expectation of privacy in floor hallway</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/14/warrantless-search-of-dorm-hallway-unlawful-absent-consent-residents-have-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy-in-floor-hallway/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/14/warrantless-search-of-dorm-hallway-unlawful-absent-consent-residents-have-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy-in-floor-hallway/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:37:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expectation of privacy in dorm hallway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search of dorm hallway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State v. Houvener]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=16</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Houvener, Washington Court of Appeals, Division III, filed June 26, 2008. Around 5:45 AM on February 11, 2006, campus police responded to a reported burglary on the third floor of a dormitory complex on the campus of Washington State University. The officer learned that the resident&#8217;s laptop computer and acoustic guitar had been [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/14/warrantless-search-of-dorm-hallway-unlawful-absent-consent-residents-have-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy-in-floor-hallway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Protective sweep unlawful; no exigent circumstances when investigating &#8220;noise at vacant house&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/01/search-seizure-state-ibarra-raya/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/01/search-seizure-state-ibarra-raya/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exigent circumstances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protective sweep]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warrantless searches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Ibarra-Raya, Washington Court of Appeals, Division III, filed July 1, 2008. Around 2:00 AM, police received 911 call of noise from a vacant house. Police went out to investigate and saw lights on and heard party noises, but nothing alarming. Police saw a truck without a license plate, but with a temporary permit. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/07/01/search-seizure-state-ibarra-raya/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Officer&#8217;s request for name in a parking lot not a seizure, but contact in public place</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/30/search-seizure-state-vanderpool/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/30/search-seizure-state-vanderpool/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[driving with suspended license]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state v. vanderpool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=13</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Vanderpool, Court of Appeals, Division III, Docket No. 26402-5, decided June 10, 2008 Police officer performed random check of vehicle&#8217;s license observed driving in a parking lot, licensing records indicated that registered owner&#8217;s husband&#8217;s license was suspended. Police officer thought the driver was registered owner&#8217;s husband. The driver parked the vehicle, the police [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/30/search-seizure-state-vanderpool/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Frisk of suspect in DSHS lobby unlawful; no reason to believe suspect was armed or dangerous</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-setterstrom/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-setterstrom/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frisk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state setterstrom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Setterstrom, Washington Supreme Court, Docket No. 79690-4, filed May 22, 2008 Mr. Setterstrom and another friend were in the lobby of Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), a government agency. Someone had complained to the police that a person was sleeping in the DSHS lobby and another was under the influence of [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-setterstrom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No seizure where no &#8220;show of authority&#8221; by police officer on foot towards pedestrian</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-harrington/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-harrington/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search & seizure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[show of authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state v. harrington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=11</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Harrington, Washington Court of Appeals, Division III, Docket No. 25497-6, filed May 13, 2008 A police officer in patrol observed Mr. Harrington walking at 11:00 PM and parked in a driveway ahead of him. The police officer got out of his car and asked to speak to Mr. Harrington. Mr. Harrington agreed and [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2008/06/19/search-seizure-state-harrington/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
