Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Harris, 202 N.W.2d 878.

76 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
g around [his vehicle], the airplane going over, [and] the daylight.” And the court noted that Adam’s vehicle was idling and positioned in a way that “block[ed] the ingress and egress for [other] cars to be able to get in and out,” finding that “a person 6 in normal control of their faculties would not stop and park and leave [their vehicle] running that way.” for the proposition that the facts he “was asleep and oddly parked” do not establish probable cause to believe he was in physical control
Charles Wayne Weyhrauch, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Jennifer Leu v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Jennifer Leu v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The term “physical control” is more comprehensive than the terms “drive” and “operate.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Physical control is “more comprehensive than either ‘drive’ or ‘operate.’” ().
R e s p o n d e n t , Minn. 2021
2( a) (1982)), which we have held was synonymous with “probable cause,”
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Probable ca use for DWI exists “whenever there are facts and circumstances known to the officer which would warrant a prudent man in believing that the individual was driving or was operating a motor vehicle on the highway while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.” d 878, 881 (Minn. 1972).
William Robert Johnson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Probable cause exists if “‘there are facts and circumstances known to the officer which would warrant a prudent man in believing that the individual was driving or was operating ’ or was in physical control of a motor vehicle while impaired.” State v. Koppi , (quoting State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42, ).
Jodie Kay Raskovich v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jodie Kay Raskovich v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Safety, (citing State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42, –81 (1972)), review denied (Minn. June 13, 1986); accord Johnson v. Comm’r of Pub.
Jason Richard Montonye v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jason Richard Montonye v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Probable cause exists when “there are facts and circumstances known to [an] officer which would warrant a prudent man in believing that [an] individual was driving or was operating a motor vehicle on the highway while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.” State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
State v. Gerard 832 N.W.2d 314 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Gerard 832 N.W.2d 314 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Safety, (accepting police officer testimony at an implied consent hearing); see also State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38 , (holding police officer had probable cause to believe defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol).
State v. Koppi 798 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 2011
State v. Koppi 798 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 2011
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , quoted in Knapp v. Comm’r of Pub.
State v. Fleck 777 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 2010
State v. Fleck 777 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 2010
The term “physical control” is more comprehensive than either the term to “drive” or to “operate.” State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 43
State v. Laducer 676 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Laducer 676 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
See State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , -81 (1972) (stating an officer is not required to see the person actually driving to believe that the person was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence).
Knapp v. Commissioner of Public Safety 610 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 2000
Knapp v. Commissioner of Public Safety 610 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 2000
An officer requesting that an individual take a test for driving while intoxicated under the implied consent law has probable cause where “there are facts and circumstances known to the officer which would warrant a prudent man in believing that the individual was driving or was operating a motor vehicle on the highway while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.” State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
State v. Lee 577 N.W.2d 730 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Lee 577 N.W.2d 730 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
State v. Paul 536 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Paul 536 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Probable cause to arrest for driving while under the influence exists “when there are facts and circumstances known to the officer which would warrant a prudent person to believe the person was driving while under the influence.” (citing State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , ).
State v. Starfield 481 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 1992
State v. Starfield 481 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 1992
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 43
State v. Shepard 473 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Shepard 473 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , -81 *321 (1972).
Kirsch v. Commissioner of Public Safety 440 N.W.2d 147 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Kirsch v. Commissioner of Public Safety 440 N.W.2d 147 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
2d 621 (1981)), to a custodial detention or arrest, requiring probable cause, State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
Steele v. Commissioner of Public Safety 439 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Steele v. Commissioner of Public Safety 439 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , 202 N.W.
Franko v. Commissioner of Public Safety 432 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Franko v. Commissioner of Public Safety 432 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
Holm v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Holm v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
Nesseth v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Nesseth v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 41-42
Overline v. State, Commissioner of Public Safety 406 N.W.2d 23 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Overline v. State, Commissioner of Public Safety 406 N.W.2d 23 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42
Pesterfield v. Commissioner of Public Safety 399 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Pesterfield v. Commissioner of Public Safety 399 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , -81 (1972).
Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 394 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 394 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , -81 (1972).
Delong v. Commissioner of Public Safety 386 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Delong v. Commissioner of Public Safety 386 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Harris, 295 Minn. 38, 42 , -81 (1972).
Musgjerd v. Commissioner of Public Safety 384 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1986