§

State v. Llamas-Villa

67 Wn. App. 448 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992)
State v. Llamas-Villa

17 Citing cases

  1. State v. Witkowski

    415 P.3d 639 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses

    In another case, Division One of this court did not distinguish between locked and unlocked containers. See State v. Llamas-Villa , 67 Wash. App. 448, 454, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). In Llamas-Villa , officers executing a premises warrant for an apartment entered a storage room outside the apartment, near the front door.

  2. State v. Hearn

    131 Wn. App. 601 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 35 times
    Holding that the mere presence of drugs in a vehicle was insufficient to show that the car was used to store drugs and that the vehicle was not used to store drugs where no fixture of the vehicle itself was used to conceal or hold the contraband

    As an issue of constitutional magnitude, it may be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn. App. 448, 454-55, 836 P.2d 239 (1992) (citing RAP 2.5(a); State v. Scott, 110 Wn.2d 682, 757 P.2d 492 (1988)); see also State v. Julian, 102 Wn. App. 296, 304, 9 P.3d 851 (2000) (holding that the right to challenge the conditions of community placement is not waived by the failure to object below). ¶10 The Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), chapter 9.94A RCW, permits the court to impose crime-related prohibitions as part of a sentence.

  3. State v. Acrey

    135 Wn. App. 938 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 15 times
    In State v. Acrey, 135 Wn. App. 938, 945, 146 P.3d 1215 (2006), a case upholding a felony sentence condition, we held that "[t]he court's jurisdiction to enter and enforce its sentence does not depend upon the authority given the Department of Corrections."

    ¶20 Under RCW 9.94A.030(13), no causal link need be established between the prohibition imposed and the crime committed, so long as the condition relates to the circumstances of the crime. State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn. App. 448, 456, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). Sentencing conditions, including crime-related prohibitions, are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Riley, 121 Wn.2d at 36-37.

  4. State v. Boyer

    124 Wn. App. 593 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 10 times
    In State v. Eserjose, officers—acting on a tip that James Eserjose and Joseph Paragone were responsible for a robbery—went to the suspect’s house at 1:30 a.m. without a warrant.

    The question turns, then, on whether the officers exceeded the scope of the warrant. ¶20 Examination of State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn. App. 448, 836 P.2d 239 (1992), a Division One case, is instructive. In Llamas-Villa, officers executed a search warrant for apartment 101 at a specified address. After entering and searching apartment 101, an officer exited the apartment and opened a door labeled "storage" located in the common hallway immediately to the right of the apartment door.

  5. State v. Matsunaga

    82 Haw. 162 (Haw. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 6 times
    Explaining that the Hawai‘i Supreme Court appeared to reject the good faith exception in Lopez, 78 Hawai‘i at 446, 896 P.2d at 902, and that if Hawai‘i did recognize the good-faith exception rule, it would not apply to the facts of the case

    State v. Erickson, 496 N.W.2d 555, 560 (N.D. 1993). See also State v. Devine, 307 Or. 341, 768 P.2d 913, 916 (1989); State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn. App. 448, 836 P.2d 239, 241 (1992). A search of a place not described in a search warrant amounts to a warrantless search and is unlawful.

  6. State v. Madrid

    No. 37482-3-III (Wash. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2021)

    "Traditionally the overbreadth and vagueness doctrines have been applied to legislative enactments." State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn.App. 448, 455, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). They have also been applied to protection or no-contact orders whose violation could result in criminal penalties, however, and to community custody conditions.

  7. State v. Persell

    No. 52236-5-II (Wash. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2020)

    A causal link between the condition imposed and the crime committed is not necessary as long as the condition relates to the crime's circumstances. State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn.App. 448, 456, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). We review a trial court's imposition of crime-related prohibitions for abuse of discretion.

  8. In re Brettell

    430 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 23 times
    Discussing preemptive effect of federal controlled substances act on state law

    Webster’s at 2062. 67 Wash. App. 448, 456, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). ¶ 18 Brettell also contends that the term "illegal drugs" reinforces the vagueness of "known."

  9. State v. Groves (In re Personal Restraint of Groves)

    No. 32961-5-III (Wash. Ct. App. Feb. 23, 2017)   Cited 1 times

    A warrant authorizing the search of an apartment may also include the search of a padlocked locker located in a storage room next to the defendant's apartment, even if the locker is not mentioned in the affidavit supporting the search warrant. State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn.App. 448, 453, 836 P.2d 239 (1992) (concluding that because the storage locker did not constitute a separate building and was not intentionally excluded from the warrant, the officers did not exceed the scope of the warrant when they searched the locker).

  10. State v. Peterson

    No. 40877-5-II (Wash. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2011)

    But, in general, "[n]o causal link need be established between the condition imposed and the crime committed, so long as the condition relates to the circumstances of the crime." State v. Llamas-Villa, 67 Wn. App. 448, 456, 836 P.2d 239 (1992). Furthermore, RCW 9.94A.703(3)(d) allows the trial court to order an offender to "[p]articipate in rehabilitative programs or otherwise perform affirmative conduct reasonably related to the circumstances of the offense, the offender's risk of reoffending, or the safety of the community."