Washington v. Chrisman
Significance, Call For Action, A Bad Time For A Party, Legal Proceedings, The Plain View Rule
State of Washington
That evidence seized during a warrantless search of the respondent's dormitory room was legally obtained and admissible in court.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Ronald R. Carpenter
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Robert F. Patrick
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens
William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
13 January 1982
Upheld the state of Washington and overturned the verdict of the Washington Court of Appeals, holding that the warrantless search of the respondent's dormitory room did not violate his Fourth Amendment right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure, and that the evidence obtained in that search was legally admissible.
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 346 (1966).
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
- Harris v. United States, 390 U.S. 234 (1968).
- Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971).
- United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973).
Marks, Alexandra. "Rolling Back Stiff Drug Sentences." Christian Science Monitor, 8 December 1998.
- Strickland, Ralph P. Jr., North Carolina Justice Academy. http://www.state.nc.us/Justice/NCJA/legap94.html
- Washington v. Seattle School District - Significance, A Thorny Problem, Resistance To Change, Legal Remedies, The Power Of The State
- Waller v. Georgia - Significance, Seven Days' Suppression For Two-and-a-half Hours Of Evidence
- Washington v. Chrisman - Significance
- Washington v. Chrisman - Call For Action
- Washington v. Chrisman - A Bad Time For A Party
- Washington v. Chrisman - Legal Proceedings
- Washington v. Chrisman - The Plain View Rule
- Washington v. Chrisman - Impact
- Washington v. Chrisman - Increased Sentencing For Drug Offenders?
- Other Free Encyclopedias