State v. Christensen

153 Wash. 2d 186 (2004) · Supreme Court of Washington · December 9, 2004

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that a conversation between the defendant and his girlfriend was a private communication under Washington's all-party-consent privacy act. It further held that the base unit of a cordless telephone, including its speakerphone function, was a device designed to transmit under RCW 9.73.030. Because the mother's testimony about the intercepted conversation was improperly admitted and the error was prejudicial, the court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial.

Holdings

  1. The conversation between Christensen and Lacey was a private communication because both manifested a subjective intent that it be private and their expectation of privacy was reasonable.
  2. The base unit of the cordless telephone, including its speakerphone component, was a device designed to transmit within the meaning of Washington's privacy act.
  3. Admission of Mrs. Dixon's testimony was prejudicial error because it was reasonably likely to have materially affected the outcome of the trial.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Christensen and Lacey's telephone conversation was a private communication under Washington's privacy act.
  2. Whether the base unit of a cordless telephone, including its speakerphone component, was a device designed to transmit under RCW 9.73.030.
  3. Whether admitting Mrs. Dixon's testimony about the intercepted conversation was harmless error.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (11)

  • State v. Townsend, 147 Wn.2d 666, 57 P.3d 255 (2002)(followed)
  • State v. Clark, 129 Wn.2d 211, 916 P.2d 384 (1996)(followed)
  • State v. Faford, 128 Wn.2d 476, 910 P.2d 447 (1996)(followed)
  • State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 867 P.2d 593 (1994)(followed)
  • State v. Myrick, 102 Wn.2d 506, 688 P.2d 151 (1984)(followed)
  • State v. Rest. Dev., Inc. v. Cananwill, Inc., 150 Wn.2d 674, 80 P.3d 598 (2003)(followed)
  • State v. Pacheco, 125 Wn.2d 150, 882 P.2d 183 (1994)(followed)
  • State v. Corliss, 123 Wn.2d 656, 870 P.2d 317 (1994)(distinguished)
  • State v. Bonilla, 23 Wn. App. 869, 598 P.2d 783 (1979)(distinguished)
  • State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d 54, 720 P.2d 808 (1986)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 11.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Washington Supreme Court