Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Stoffels, 94 N.W. 675.

33 citing documents.

City of Golden Valley v. Wiebesick 899 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 2017
City of Golden Valley v. Wiebesick 899 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 2017
See State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , 94 N.W.
Rosvall v. Provost 155 N.W.2d 900 Minn. 1968
Rosvall v. Provost 155 N.W.2d 900 Minn. 1968
See, State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , .
State v. Sauer 15 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1944
State v. Sauer 15 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1944
Defendant relies on State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , ; State v. Pluth, 157 Minn. 145 , ; and State v. Kaasa, 198 Minn. 381 , .
State v. Kaasa 269 N.W. 365 Minn. 1936
State v. Kaasa 269 N.W. 365 Minn. 1936
State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , ; State v. Hoyle, 98 Minn. 254 , ; State v. Rogne, 115 Minn. 204 , ; State v. Hesse, 154 Minn. 89 , ; City of Mankato v. Grabowenski, 154 Minn. 265 , ; State v. Pluth, 157 Minn. 145 , .
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Peterson 230 N.W. 830 Minn. 1930
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Peterson 230 N.W. 830 Minn. 1930
State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , 94 N.W.
State v. Pluth 195 N.W. 789 Minn. 1923
State v. Pluth 195 N.W. 789 Minn. 1923
In State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , , this court held that incriminating articles (in that case intoxicating liquors) seized under a search warrant were admissible in evidence.
State v. Ryan 194 N.W. 396 Minn. 1923
State v. Ryan 194 N.W. 396 Minn. 1923
State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , .
State v. Clark 192 N.W. 737 Minn. 1923
City of Mankato v. Grabowenski 191 N.W. 603 Minn. 1923
City of Mankato v. Grabowenski 191 N.W. 603 Minn. 1923
We find it unnecessary to determine whether Ordinance Number 91 is valid, or whether the liquor was lawfully seized, for the law was settled in this state, by the decisions in State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , ; State v. Hoyle, 98 Minn. 254 , ; and State v. Rogne, 115 Minn. 204 , , that liquor or other property, though forcibly seized, and even though unlawfully seized, may be received in evidence.
State v. Hesse 191 N.W. 267 Minn. 1922
State v. Hesse 191 N.W. 267 Minn. 1922
If it be conceded that the warrant was fatally defective in the respect stated, still the ruling of the learned trial court was in accord with the decisions of this court in State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , ; State v. Hoyle, 98 Minn. 254 , , and State v. Rogne, 115 Minn. 204 , , where documentary evidence found on the premises of the accused and seized by officers without any search warrant at all was held admissible against the objection here urged.
State v. Richman 173 N.W. 718 Minn. 1919
State v. Richman 173 N.W. 718 Minn. 1919
State v. Pearce, 56 Minn. 226 , ; State v. Holmes, 65 Minn. 230 , ; State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , .
State ex rel. Miller v. Carver 147 N.W. 660 Minn. 1914
State ex rel. Miller v. Carver 147 N.W. 660 Minn. 1914
“It is not an open question in this state that the legislature may constitutionally provide for the establishment of prohibition districts by local option or by direct legislation, although the license of the sale of intoxicating liquors is the general rule of the state, and prohibition in certain districts the exception.” State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , ; Foster v. Kansas, 112 U. S. 201 , 5 Sup.
Ingraham v. Booton 134 N.W. 505 Minn. 1912
Ingraham v. Booton 134 N.W. 505 Minn. 1912
State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , .
State v. Rogne 132 N.W. 5 Minn. 1911
State v. Rogne 132 N.W. 5 Minn. 1911
The question is covered by the case of State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , , where the contentions of defendant are fully answered.
Hawkins v. Langum 131 N.W. 1014 Minn. 1911
Hawkins v. Langum 131 N.W. 1014 Minn. 1911
Upon a careful consideration of the allegations of the answer and the brief of plaintiff’s counsel, we are unable to distinguish this case on principle from that of State v. Hanson, 114 Minn. 136 , , which *102 held, following State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205, 209 , , that, the statute here in question was constitutional.
State v. Hanson 130 N.W. 79 Minn. 1911
State v. Hanson 130 N.W. 79 Minn. 1911
We held, in the case of State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , , that a similar statute was constitutional, for the reason that: “No one questions the validity of laws providing for the issuing of warrants for the search, seizure, and destruction of implements of gaming, lottery tickets, and obscene books, and other similar articles and means of crime.
State ex rel. Board of Education v. Brown 106 N.W. 477 Minn. 1906
State ex rel. Board of Education v. Brown 106 N.W. 477 Minn. 1906
In State v. Stoffels, 89 Minn. 205 , , chapter 252, p. 398, Laws 1901, prohibiting and punishing the keeping of blind pigs within the limits of any prohibition district, was held to be general legislation.