State of Washington v. Mayfield

This court case is completed

Mr. Mayfield argued he was unlawfully seized when a police officer prolonged his detention by questioning him and asking repeatedly for consent to search, when Mayfield felt he had no choice but to agree. However, because Mr. Mayfield’s brief was not structured around certain criteria, known as a Gunwall analysis, the Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. We filed an amicus brief with other amici in September, 2018 arguing that requirement of this specific form of analysis, when a State Constitutional right to privacy is asserted and claims have been supported, poses a substantial risk to privacy protections in Washington State. On February 7, 2019, the Washington Supreme Court issued an Opinion agreeing the Gunwall analysis was not required and ruling that exceptions to suppression of evidence found in violation of state constitutional privacy protections must be narrowly construed, thus the evidence found in Mr. Mayfield’s case should be suppressed.
Explore More: