Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. LaBarre, 195 N.W.2d 435.

44 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.” see also State v. LaBarre , (stating that issues “raised for the first time on appeal .
State of Minnesota v. Roosevelt Hunter 857 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Roosevelt Hunter 857 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
had immediate and accessible possession of the cocaine, hashish, and LSD found in the front bedroom.” 292 Minn. 228, 237, (emphasis added).
State v. Dickey 827 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Dickey 827 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 390 , State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 232-33, 237 , 441 (1972); review denied (Minn. June 13, 2000).
State v. Arnold 794 N.W.2d 397 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Arnold 794 N.W.2d 397 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
(citing State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 237 , ).
State v. Smith 619 N.W.2d 766 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Smith 619 N.W.2d 766 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 237
State v. Robinson 517 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1994
State v. Robinson 517 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1994
See State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 237 , (dominion may be shared with others).
State v. Starkey 516 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1994
State v. Starkey 516 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1994
State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , (holding criminal defendant could not challenge scope of search warrant and justification for nighttime search for first time on appeal).
Commissioner v. Fort 479 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1992
Commissioner v. Fort 479 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1992
See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411, 422 , -76 (1973); State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 237
State v. Skinner 450 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State v. Gabbert 411 N.W.2d 209 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Gabbert 411 N.W.2d 209 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
When determining the existence of probable cause, the trial court or reviewing court “is restricted to consider only the information presented at the time of the application for the search warrant.” State v. Labarre, 292 Minn. 228, 233
State v. Cusick 372 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Wiley 366 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 1985
State v. Wiley 366 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 1985
(defendant constructively possessed narcotics found, along with a passport, in his bedroom in a mobile home defendant jointly leased with a friend); State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , (defendant constructively possessed marijuana found in bedroom along with letters addressed to defendant and the front end of defendant’s motorcycle); State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , (defendant constructively possessed, either singly or with others, narcotics found in bedroom which contained papers identifying de
State v. Filipi 297 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1980
State v. Filipi 297 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1980
State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 235
State v. Colsch 284 N.W.2d 839 Minn. 1979
State v. Colsch 284 N.W.2d 839 Minn. 1979
See, State v. Florine, 303 Minn. 103 , State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228
State v. Merrill 274 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1978
State v. Merrill 274 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1978
See, State v. Kremer, 307 Minn. 309, 312 , State v. La-Barre, 292 Minn. 228, 237
State v. Willis 269 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1978
State v. Willis 269 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1978
See, State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , State v. Bosnich, 273 Minn. 553
State v. Hoven 269 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 1978
State v. Causey 257 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1977
State v. Causey 257 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1977
1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964), and restated in State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 235 , : “[T]he affidavit [must contain] the underlying facts and circumstances to enable the magistrate to independently judge (1) that the informant obtained his knowledge of the reported criminal activity in a reliable manner; and (2) that the officer-affiant had a sufficient basis to beli
State v. Nolting 254 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 1977
State v. Nolting 254 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 1977
Hearsay information contained in an affidavit must satisfy a two-pronged test originally advanced in Aguilar and expressed in State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 285 , : “* * * [T]he affidavit [must contain] the underlying facts and circumstances to enable the magistrate to independently judge (1) that the informant obtained his knowledge of the reported criminal activity in a reliable manner; and (2) that the officer-affiant had a sufficient basis
State v. Carr 249 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1976
State v. Carr 249 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1976
See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 , State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168 , ” In this case the police found the heroin in a cabinet in the living room of a house which defendant shared with a woman and two children.
State v. Kremer 239 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1976
State v. Kremer 239 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1976
In fact, in State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , this court ruled that since defendant’s contentions regarding the scope of the search and the justification for a nighttime search— the identical issue raised in the instant case — were raised for the first time on appeal, these issues were “not properly presented under soundly based and set
State v. Florine 226 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1975
State v. Florine 226 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1975
See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 , State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228 , State v. Resnick, 287 Minn. 168
State v. Wiley 205 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1973
State v. Wiley 205 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1973
State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228
State v. Daniels 200 N.W.2d 403 Minn. 1972
State v. Daniels 200 N.W.2d 403 Minn. 1972
See, also, this court’s post-Harris opinion in State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228