Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Smith v. Hubbard, 91 N.W.2d 756.

51 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State v. Campbell 814 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
Lickteig v. Kolar 782 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 2010
Lickteig v. Kolar 782 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 2010
Brett, d at 203 (citing Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 225 , rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District v. Horner 617 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 2000
State v. Richmond 602 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Richmond 602 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
1(c)(1); Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 220 , (including misdemeanors in definition of public offense).
Brett v. Watts 601 N.W.2d 199 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Brett v. Watts 601 N.W.2d 199 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
See, e.g., Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 225 , (plaintiff who demonstrated mental harm as a result of kidding by coworkers about defendant’s battery was entitled to monetary damages); (once plaintiff proves battery, plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for h
Piotrowski v. Commissioner of Public Safety 453 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1990
Piotrowski v. Commissioner of Public Safety 453 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1990
§ 629.40 (1988) [State Dept. of Public Safety v. Nystrom, 299 Minn. 224, 225 , and Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 219 , ]; two, that the arrests were valid as citizen’s arrests by the police under Minn.Stat.
Johnson v. Morris 453 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1990
Johnson v. Morris 453 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1990
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 221
Johnson v. Ramsey County 424 N.W.2d 800 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Johnson v. Ramsey County 424 N.W.2d 800 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Compare Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 225 , (allowing compensatory damages for humiliation and mental suffering resulting from a battery), and Smith v. Salem, 150 Minn. 418, 419 , 185 N.W.
Windschitl v. Commissioner of Public Safety 355 N.W.2d 146 Minn. 1984
Windschitl v. Commissioner of Public Safety 355 N.W.2d 146 Minn. 1984
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 220 , Minn.Stat.
State v. Sellers 350 N.W.2d 460 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Sellers 350 N.W.2d 460 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 224
State, Department of Public Safety v. Rice 323 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1982
State, Department of Public Safety v. Rice 323 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1982
629.34; State v. Miller, 290 Minn. 33 , and Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215
State v. Filipi 297 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1980
State v. Filipi 297 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1980
See Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 224
State v. Bale 267 N.W.2d 730 Minn. 1978
State v. Bale 267 N.W.2d 730 Minn. 1978
789 (1923), and Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215
Lundeen v. Renteria 224 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1974
Lundeen v. Renteria 224 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1974
629.34, which provides in part: “A peace officer may, without warrant, arrest a person : “(1) For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.” In Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 221 , it was held that two elements must appear before an of *148 fense is committed in the presence of an officer: “(1) He must become aware of the acts as a result of his sensory perception, and (2) he must infer that the acts constitute an offense.” In elaborating on the second of thes
State, Department of Public Safety v. Nystrom 217 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 1974
State, Department of Public Safety v. Nystrom 217 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 1974
629.40; Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215
Caspersen v. Webber 213 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1973
Caspersen v. Webber 213 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1973
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , Crea v. Wuellner, 235 Minn. 408 , Moore v. Fisher, 117 Minn. 339
State v. Cormican 195 N.W.2d 586 Minn. 1972
State v. Cormican 195 N.W.2d 586 Minn. 1972
629.34; State v. Miller, 290 Minn. 33 , and Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215
State v. Dax 188 N.W.2d 422 Minn. 1971
State v. Dax 188 N.W.2d 422 Minn. 1971
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756 ; State v. Fish, 280 Minn. 163 , 159 N. W. (2d) 786 ; State v. Valstad, 282 Minn. 301 , 165 N. W. (2d) 19 .
State v. Miller 185 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1971
State v. Miller 185 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1971
And, where the officer could not observe nor become cognizant of the act constituting the offense by the use of his senses, it could not be committed in his presence so as to authorize an arrest without a warrant.” In Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 221 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756, 762 , this court amplified the rule in Pluth by stating: “Clearly two elements must appear before an offense is committed in the presence of an officer: (1) He must become aware *38 of the acts as a result of his sensory per
State, Department of Highways v. Styrbicki 169 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1969
State, Department of Highways v. Styrbicki 169 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1969
1 However, in Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 222 , 91 N.W.
Dobosenski v. Carlton County 157 N.W.2d 847 Minn. 1968
Dobosenski v. Carlton County 157 N.W.2d 847 Minn. 1968
629.40; Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756 .
State v. Intihar 152 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1967
State v. Intihar 152 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1967
While in a misdemeanor case these elements tend to merge, they are not identical, as fully discussed in Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , 221 to 223, 91 N. W. (2d) 756 , 762 to 763.
State v. Duren 123 N.W.2d 624 Minn. 1963
State v. Duren 123 N.W.2d 624 Minn. 1963
The search was made before the arrest and at a time when the officers had no authority to make an arrest.” The above rule was reaffirmed in Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215, 221 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756, 762 , where the court stated: “Clearly two elements must appear before an offense is committed in the presence of an officer: (1) He must become aware of the acts as a result of his sensory perception, and (2) he must infer that the acts constitute an offense.” (Italics supplied.)
State v. Meany 115 N.W.2d 247 Minn. 1962
State v. Meany 115 N.W.2d 247 Minn. 1962
9 State v. Hayes, 244 Minn. 296 , 70 N. W. (2d) 110 ; Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756 .
Hammersten v. Reiling 115 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1962
Hammersten v. Reiling 115 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1962
Smith v. Hubbard, 253 Minn. 215 , 91 N. W. (2d) 756 ; Sweeney v. Myers, 199 Minn. 21 , ; Bronson Steel Arch Shoe Co. v. T. K. Kelly Investment Co. 183 Minn. 135 , ; Krienke v. Citizens Nat.
City of St. Paul v. Ulmer 111 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 1961