OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - In two cases resting on privacy rights, the state Supreme Court on Thursday banned random police searches of hotel registries and said state regulators shouldn't have pulled a fraud defendant's bank records without his knowledge.

In the first case, the court ruled 7-3 that random police checks of hotel and motel registries in high-crime areas are an illegal invasion of the state constitution's strong privacy protections.

The decision overturned the drug conviction of Timothy Enrique Jorden, who was sentenced to nearly two years after a Pierce County sheriff's deputy found crack in his room at the Golden Lion Motel in Lakewood.

Police raided the room after matching Jorden's name on the guest registry with two arrest warrants. Deputy Reynaldo Punzalan's check of the motel registry was part of the "Lakewood Crime-Free Hotel Motel Program," in which businesses with a reputation for criminal customers get training in crime reduction methods and agree to police checks.

Washington state's constitution prohibits such searches because hotel guests have a privacy interest in their listing on the registry, Justice Bobbe Bridge wrote for the majority.

"A random, suspicionless search is a fishing expedition, and we have indicated displeasure with such practices on many occasions," the majority said.

In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Jim Johnson said the hotel search program could continue if potential police scrutiny was simply disclosed in a waiver signed by hotel guests.

But Justices Barbara Madsen and Charles Johnson dissented, saying hotel guests have no privacy interest in their guest registry listing. The majority's ruling, they said, "removes a valuable law enforcement tool."

In another case decided Thursday, the court said state regulators illegally reviewed the bank records of a man accused of securities fraud, theft and other crimes.

After a complaint from a consumer, securities regulators from the state Department of Financial Institutions issued an administrative subpoena to Washington Mutual for a broad set of bank records belonging to Michael M. Miles.

Miles subsequently was charged with fraud, theft, witness intimidation and tampering. But Miles argued that evidence from the subpoenaed bank records should be suppressed, because he was not notified the government was accessing his files.

The Supreme Court agreed, overturning the trial court and invalidating part of a state law that allows agencies to issue administrative subpoenas to third parties for private information.

Majority justices rejected the trial court's holding that Miles had a lessened privacy expectation because he was part of a "pervasively regulated industry."

"Just because a person engages in a business that is regulated (even pervasively) does not expose that person's nonbusiness related private matters to public inspection," Justice Charles Johnson wrote for the majority.

Justices Bobbe Bridge, Susan Owens and Barbara Madsen concurred with the result of the ruling, but signed a separate opinion that objected to the majority's broader rejection of the administrative subpoena rules.