DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Gannaway, 191 N.W.2d 555.

29 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    (“Gannaway’s reaching for h is outer coat pocket, even after being warned not to do so, gave [the officer] reasonable cause to initiate a protective frisk for weapons.”) .
  • State v. Varnado 582 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Yarnado 582 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Varnado 582 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 1998
    See also State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 392-93 , State v. Curtis, 290 Minn. 429, 431 , State v. Clifford, 273 Minn. 249, 254 , -28 (1966).
  • State v. Yarnado 582 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 1998
    See also State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 392-93 , State v. Curtis, 290 Minn. 429, 431 , State v. Clifford, 273 Minn. 249, 254 , -28 (1966).
  • State v. Crook 485 N.W.2d 726 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Crook 485 N.W.2d 726 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    See State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 393 , (inside of pocket is not within scope of weapons search where there is no palpable indication of weapon in pocket).
  • State v. Dickerson 469 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Dickerson 469 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
    le when the object felt is soft in nature.” (quoting 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure, § 9.4(c) at 130 (1978)); e.g., State v. Bitterman, 304 Minn. 481, 486 , (seizure of prescription bottle, which was a hard object that, when felt through the clothes, the officer thought might be a weapon was justified); State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 394 , (pipe reasonably thought to be a weapon).
  • State v. Hart 412 N.W.2d 797 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Hart 412 N.W.2d 797 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    The court relied on State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391
  • State v. Alesso 328 N.W.2d 685 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Alesso 328 N.W.2d 685 Minn. 1982
    seizing it because he had already lawfully found a plastic bag of marijuana in the defendant’s other pocket and therefore could assume that this packet which he felt also contained drugs); State v. Bitterman, 304 Minn. 481 , (seizure of prescription bottle, which was a hard object that, when felt through the clothes, the officer thought might be a weapon); State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391 , (pipe).
  • State v. Gilchrist 299 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Gilchrist 299 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1980
    Paul v. Vaughn, 306 Minn. 337 , State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391
  • State v. Cavegn 294 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Cavegn 294 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1980
    Accord, State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391
  • State v. Hoven 269 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Hoven 269 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 1978
    A similar conclusion was reached in State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 392 , (“Ordinarily police officers may not, without a search warrant, make an exploratory search of a person arrested for a minor traffic offense.”) 2 In a recent case with comparable facts, an appellate court of Illinois held that a warrantless search of the trunk of an automobile followi
  • City of St. Paul v. Vaughn 237 N.W.2d 365 Minn. 1975
  • City of St. Paul v. Vaughn 237 N.W.2d 365 Minn. 1975
    It appears from the lower court’s reliance on State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391 , a case dealing with the permissible scope of a search incident to a traffic arrest, that the court may have been applying a probable-cause standard rather than the less stringent Terry standard.
  • State v. Bitterman 232 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1975
  • State v. Bitterman 232 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1975
    Terry v. Ohio, supra; Sibron v. New York, 392 U. S. 40 , 88 S. Ct. 1889 , 20 L. ed. 2d 917 (1968); State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391 , and Adams v. Williams, supra, in which the court stated, in expanding the Terry doctrine : “The Court recognized in Terry that the policeman making a reasonable investigatory stop should not be denied the opportunity to protect himself from attack by a hostile suspect.
  • State v. Cross 206 N.W.2d 371 Minn. 1973
  • State v. Cross 206 N.W.2d 371 Minn. 1973
    e scope or intrusive extent of the search, when viewed in relation to the minor offense for which he was arrested, the safety of the officer secured by the drawn weapons, and the finding that defendant possessed only a knife, became exploratory, exceeding the limits of reasonableness which, he argues, we condemned in State v. Curtis, 290 Minn. 429 , and State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391
  • State v. Wicklund 205 N.W.2d 509 Minn. 1973
  • State v. Wicklund 205 N.W.2d 509 Minn. 1973
    State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391 , State v. Shevchuk, 291 Minn. 365
  • State v. Ellanson 198 N.W.2d 136 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Ellanson 198 N.W.2d 136 Minn. 1972
    See, State v. Gannaway, 291 Minn. 391, 392