Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hodgman, 257 N.W.2d 313.

19 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Raenard Romalle Douglas Minn. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Raenard Romalle Douglas Minn. 2025
8 During oral argument, decided after the Legislature reduced the penalty for possessing small amounts of marijuana in 1976, we continued to endorse the position that the odor of marijuana alone would constitute probable cause for a warrantless vehicle search.
State of Minnesota v. Shoulwin Melbrook Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 313, 314 (Minn. 1977) (stating an officer’s observation of “a plastic pill bottle” and knowledge that “this is how people carry narcotics” supported finding of probable cause to search vehicle); - 13 (Minn. 1990) (“[T]he lawful discovery of drugs or other contraband in a mo
State of Minnesota v. James Michael Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
( stating that an o fficer’s observation of “a plastic pill bottle” and knowledge that this “is how people carry narcotics ” supported the determination that there was probable cause to search the vehicle).
State of Minnesota v. Tiffany Renee Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“It has long been held that the detection of odor s alone, which trained police officers can identify as being illicit, constitutes probable cause to search automobiles for further evidence of crime .”); (marijuana); Moody, d at 44 (paint fumes) .
State of Minnesota v. Nathan David Hunter Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“[T]he detection of odors alone, which trained police officers can identify as being illicit, constitutes probable cause to search aut omobiles for further evidence of crime.” see also State v. Schultz , d 836, 837 (Minn. 1978); State v. Hodgman
State of Minnesota v. David Joshua John Skotte Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Ardana Jo Beaulieu Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Schultz , ; State v. Hodgman
State of Minnesota v. Jonathan Eugene Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Cobb v. Commissioner of Public Safety 410 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Cobb v. Commissioner of Public Safety 410 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Claussen 353 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Claussen 353 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Menard 341 N.W.2d 888 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Menard 341 N.W.2d 888 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Schinzing 342 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1983
State v. Schinzing 342 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1983
(each holding that the trial court clearly erred in crucial findings on which the suppression order was based) with State v. Dillon, 308 Minn. 464 , (holding that the trial court did not clearly err in disbelieving police officer).
State v. Kvam 336 N.W.2d 525 Minn. 1983
State v. Kvam 336 N.W.2d 525 Minn. 1983
Compare State v. Dillon, 308 Minn. 464 , (holding that the trial court did not clearly err in disbelieving the police officer) (holding that the trial court clearly erred in its crucial finding on which the suppression order was based).