Washington v. Z. U. E. (Majority and Concurrence)
Annotate this CaseThe issue this case presented for the Washington Supreme Court's review centered on whether, under either the state or federal constitutions, the information provided by multiple 911 callers was reliable and sufficient to justify an investigatory Terry stop of the car in which defendant was a passenger. Defendant Z.U.E. moved to suppress evidence of marijuana found on him following the stop, arguing that the officers lacked a reasonable basis to detain the car and its occupants. The trial court denied Z.U.E.'s motion, and the Court of Appeals reversed. In determining whether the information provided by a series of 911 calls provided the officers sufficient reliable information to justify stopping Z.U.E.'s car, the Supreme Court declined to strictly apply the two-pronged "Aguilar/Spinelli" analysis, but it recognized the two factors' relevance and usefulness to the reliability analysis. In this case case before us, the State did not establish that the series of 911 calls provided the officers with any articulable reason to suspect any of the passengers in this particular car were engaged in criminal activity. Therefore, the officers' subsequent seizure of Z.U.E. was therefore unlawful, and any evidence obtained as a result of that seizure should have been suppressed at trial.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.