Mainsail
Regular Member
imported post
The other half a State v Day:
The other half a State v Day:
The outcome of this appeal is controlled by the outcome of the co-
defendant's case. Since the Washington Supreme Court has reversed the conviction of
the co-defendant, the conviction in this matter also must be reversed.
Appellant Alice Day and her husband, Charlie Day, were arrested after an officer
investigating a parking infraction searched them and found a weapon. A later search
incident to the arrest discovered evidence of methamphetamine manufacturing activity.
After losing a joint suppression hearing, the Days were separately convicted of
methamphetamine related offenses. The Washington Supreme Court ultimately reversed
Charlie Day's conviction for manufacturing methamphetamine and remanded to the trial
court for further proceedings. State v. Day, 161 Wn.2d 889, 168 P.3d 1265 (2007).
No. 25016-4-III
State v. Day
Alice Day was eventually convicted at a bench trial of possession of
pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Her appeal raises the
same issues as her husband's case. The Washington Supreme Court determined in
Charlie Day's appeal that the officer lacked authority of law to conduct a frisk in the
course of investigating a parking infraction. That ruling requires the same result in this
action.
The conviction is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings
consistent with the opinion in State v. Day.