# State v. Young

> Washington Supreme Court · February 10, 1994 · 123 Wash. 2d 173

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558831

## Case

- **Full name:** The State of Washington, Respondent, v. Robert Alan Young, Appellant
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 10, 1994
- **Citations:** 123 Wash. 2d 173; 867 P.2d 593; 1994 Wash. LEXIS 122
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Durham
- **Judges:** Johnson, Durham, Madsen
- **Cited by:** 295 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558831

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that defendant's reliance on Ferrier was misplaced since police did not engage in a knock and talk procedure
- recognizing that police use of an infrared thermal device to detect heat distribution patterns within a home undetectable by human senses is particularly intrusive and exceeded article I, section 7 privacy protection
- holding that the use of a thermal imager is a search under the Fourth Amendment because it gathers information about the home that could not be gathered with the naked eye
- finding search of a toilet stall offensive because society recognizes a reasonable expectation of privacy in those bodily functions which take place in a bathroom stall
- quoting, in turn, State v. Simpson, 95 Wash.2d 170, 622 P.2d 1199 (1980)

## Opinion text

Durham, J.
(concurring) — I agree with the majority (pages 188-194) that the use of the infrared device in this case constituted a search under the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution. I would, therefore, reverse Young’s conviction. I do not, however, concur in the majority’s analysis of article 1, section 7 of the Washington State Constitution.
Andersen, C. J., concurs with Durham, J.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9558831. Public record. Not legal advice.