WA: No REP in ALPR so no prejudice from destruction of data

Defendant moved to suppress based on ALPR tracking. The data was gone. He moved to dismiss for destroying it, which was granted. Since it’s not a violation of his reasonable expectation of privacy, he can’t be prejudiced by it. Reversed. State v. Simonson, 2026 Wash. App. LEXIS 173 (Jan. 29, 2026) (unpublished):

The Flock ALPR system’s photograph of the vehicle Simonson was operating in plain view on a public road did not disturb his private affairs under article 1, section 7 of the Washington Constitution. This momentary observation is analogous to a law enforcement officer visually noting a license plate number and conducting a routine check of licensing records, which has long been held permissible without implicating constitutional privacy protection. See Martin, 106 Wn. App. at 861-62. Because Simonson did not have a privacy interest in the publicly displayed license plate, his CrR 3.6 motion would not have been successful. Consequently, Simonson was not prejudiced by the failure to preserve the Flock data.

This entry was posted in Automatic license plate readers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.