The Winnebago citation

At the Night Out a question came up about is an RV a home or a vehicle, this is the WA Supreme Court case that seems applicable to me.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12540133575062513898&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr State v. Vrieling

tl;dr it is a vehicle and subject to a search, incident to an arrest. Dissent makes interesting reading as well. The case even involves a firearm found by the search.

So I would gather that if the RV is one the road, its a vehicle but in a trailer park, its a home..

Its a retarded ruling, like all other exceptions to the 4th amendment....they can secure the motor home and get a warrant...police can secure a car and get a warrant. If the people are out of a car or RV, then why is not a warrant required? Its bad case law that requires so many twists and turns to get to where they got, you know its bad case law.

That got kind of involved. Thanks for the post.

Another great dissent by Sanders, and another watering down of rights by the majority.

Vote Sanders!

I gotta say though the lady was dumb for wandering around during a stop.

My wife and I just took the class required to get our Oregon CHL last week. The class included some WA state law. One of the things the instructor told us was once you park your motor home, travel trailer or camper that it is considered your home. Is this not true?

I expect the answer to that would be ...Maybe. The cited case deals with a traffic stop as the initial encounter, if you mean parked in a campground or RV lot, I expect the answer would be yes,parked at a gas station or some other temporary stop, I doubt it.

The other question is does anyone have a cite for how long/convoluted your trip to or from a .060 exception can last?

Vitaeus said:

I expect the answer to that would be ...Maybe. The cited case deals with a traffic stop as the initial encounter, if you mean parked in a campground or RV lot, I expect the answer would be yes,parked at a gas station or some other temporary stop, I doubt it.

The other question is does anyone have a cite for how long/convoluted your trip to or from a .060 exception can last?

Click to expand...

LE is going to have some discretion in this manner...

View attachment StarksResponse8-17-11.pdf

Vitaeus said:

The other question is does anyone have a cite for how long/convoluted your trip to or from a .060 exception can last?

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any rulings on that in Washington. I've run across mention of that from other places, most recently in Washington D.C. (definitely not a good place for gun owners).

From what I've read, if you're going direct, you're covered. If you stop for lunch on the way, you're probably covered, but might not be; You should be, but not all courts and cops agree. In one of those D.C. examples I mentioned, an emergency trip to the hospital on his way home got a guy in serious hot water.

If you go in the morning and do two dozen errands "on your way" back home, then you probably are not covered.

FLETC states that it's both, depending on circumstances.

If it's mobile, then the mobile conveyance exception to the 4th applies.

If it's stationary, and not readily mobile (engine not running, or wheel chocks out, or awning deployed, etc etc), it's a 'home'.

I don't know how WA interprets it, but the feds interpret it as a home when not in motion.