Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. High, 176 N.W.2d 637.

26 citing documents.

Corey James Wright v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Corey James Wright v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
at 571 (citing State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, ).
State of Minnesota v. Zachary Michael McGowan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Zachary Michael McGowan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
McGowan supports this argument by relying on State v. High, 287 Minn. 24
State of Minnesota v. Paul Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Paul Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13, 68 S. Ct. 367, 368 (1948) (holding that consent to search requested under the “color of office” was a mere submission to authority and not valid consent); State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, (holding that written consent was a mere submission to legal authority where the defendant had been held in custody for a prolonged period of time).
Peter Alan Krech v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Peter Alan Krech v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
at 571-72 (citing State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, ).
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Robert Forster Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Robert Forster Minn. Ct. App. 2015
While it is true that agreement, standing alone, is not dispositive of consent, see Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 12-13, 68 S. Ct. 367, 368 (1948) (holding that 5 consent to a search requested under the “color of office” was a mere submission to authority and not valid consent); State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, (holding that written consent was a mere submission to legal authority where the defendant had been held in custody for a prolonged period of time), the district court did not
Darrick Alan Duncan v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Darrick Alan Duncan v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
at 571 (citing State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27–28, ).
Randall Frank Larch v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Randall Frank Larch v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
at 571 (citing State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, ).
Mark Ward Nippa v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Mark Ward Nippa v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
at 571 (citing State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27-28, 176 ).
State of Minnesota v. Chad Michael Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Chad Michael Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Although a person who has been seized may still voluntarily consent, we infer consent less readily after a seizure because ‘once arrested, a person becomes more susceptible to police duress and coercion.’” Diede, d at 847 (quoting State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27, ).
State v. Brooks 838 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 2013
State v. Brooks 838 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 2013
With respect to the question of coercion, we have been less willing to find that a defendant voluntarily consented to a search after he or she has been arrested because someone in custody “becomes more susceptible to police duress and coercion.” See, e.g., State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27 , see also United States v. Mitchell, 322 U.S. 65, 69 , 64 S.Ct.
State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
Consent must be the product of more than mere submission to legal au *848 thority.” State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27
State v. Hummel 483 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 1992
State v. Hummel 483 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 1992
“Consent must be the product of more than mere submission to legal authority.” State v. High, 287 Minn. 24, 27
State v. Armstrong 194 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1972
State v. Armstrong 194 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1972
2 State v, High, 287 Minn. 24, 27