In the linked cases, the Court of Appeals also affirmed the admissibility of the recordings, by separate opinions, citing the decision in State v. D.J.W. as dispositive. E.g., State v. Clark, 76 Wn. App. 150, 883 P.2d 333 (1994). This court consolidated all of the Operation Hardfall cases under State v. Clark, No. 62438-1.

¶67 In this situation, our case law is clear that a showing of discriminatory purpose or intent is required; disparate impact is insufficient. State v. Coria, 120 Wash.2d 156, 174-75, 839 P.2d 890 (1992) (impact of sentencing enhancement on minorities); State v.Johnson , 194 Wash. App. 304, 308, 374 P.3d 1206 (2016) (disparate impact of court fees); State v. Clark , 76 Wash. App. 150, 156-57, 883 P.2d 333 (1994) (disparate impact resulting from ineligibility for sentencing alternative). Ms. Howell provides no evidence of discriminatory purpose behind the known abuser statute.

LAWS OF 1988, ch. 154, at 637. 76 Wn. App. 150, 156-57, 883 P.2d 333 (1994), aff'd, 129 Wn.2d 211, 916 P.2d 384 (1996) (holding that a statute providing for a waiver of standard sentencing for first time offenders that excluded offenders convicted of delivering narcotic substances passed minimal scrutiny because the classification related to the state's interest in controlling the problems created by such drugs).In re Elec. Lightwave, Inc., 123 Wn.2d 530, 545, 869 P.2d 1045 (1994).

But the Court has repeatedly rejected the contention that the state provision should be independently interpreted, consistently holding "that the privileges and immunities clause and the equal protection clause are substantially identical and considered by this court as one issue." State v. Clark, 76 Wn. App. 150, 155, 883 P.2d 333 (1994), aff'd, 129 Wn.2d 211, 916 P.2d 384 (1996) (quoting State v. Smith, 117 Wn.2d 263, 281, 814 P.2d 652 (1991)). We see little reason to believe the Court would find an expanded state constitutional right to the appointment of counsel for petitioners seeking discretionary review.