Appellant's Brief - Washington State Courts
Appellant's Brief - Washington State Courts
Appellant's Brief - Washington State Courts
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
makes mention in this affidavit of actions taken by Officer<br />
Budinich, not to assist with establishing probable cause, but<br />
to make the judge aware of the actions of Officer Budinich<br />
and the facts of the case. Officer Budinich, with the victim<br />
present, used the keys to open the back door of the trailer,<br />
and a knife to pry a door that didn't have a key. Officer<br />
Budinich observed vehicle license plates and VIN plates in a<br />
small bag in the trailer while doing so. Oficer Budinich<br />
then contacted a supervisor and was told to impound the<br />
vehicle for a warrant.<br />
It is important to note that the complaint for the search warrant<br />
misrepresents the order of events leading up to Mr. Hendrickson's arrest<br />
and the initial search of the trailer. The facts as stated in the complaint<br />
suggest that Mr. Hendrickson was not placed under arrest until after<br />
Officer Budinich had taken the keys from Mr. Hendrickson's belt and<br />
unlocked the trailer. As indicated above, this is not what happened. Mr.<br />
Hendrickson was arrested immediately after identifling himself, and the<br />
trailer was searched only after Mr. Hendrickson was handcuffed and placed<br />
in the back of Officer Budinich's patrol car.<br />
The only item identified in the complaint as belonging to Leo<br />
Brutsch was the trailer itself. The trailer had already been recovered,<br />
obviating the need to search the trailer for any more of Leo Brutsche's<br />
stolen property. The complaint failed to set forth any facts to support the