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. Lien, 265 N.W.2d 833.

81 citing documents.

  • State v. Alt 469 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Lindsey 460 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Lindsey 460 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
    840 n. 1 (Minn.1978) (questioning how far the exclusionary rule should apply where there is no police misconduct because police obtained a warrant).
  • State v. Dyer 438 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Dyer 438 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    C. Justification for “No Knock” the supreme court articulated guidelines for determining whether an unannounced entry should be authorized.
  • Costillo v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 730 Minn. 1987
  • Costillo v. Commissioner of Public Safety 416 N.W.2d 730 Minn. 1987
    erpreter); (questioning whether exclusionary rule should apply to any violation of state law by officer in acting outside his jurisdiction); (refusing to automatically exclude statement obtained as a product of unnecessary delay before arraignment under our state rules of criminal procedure); (holding that nighttime execution of search warrant was a statutory, not a constitutional, violation and that exclusion of evidence seized therefore was not mandated); see also State v. Eubanks, 283 N.C.
  • State v. Ailport 412 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Ailport 412 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    the Supreme Court enumerated the following principles governing the unannounced entry of a dwelling place to execute a search warrant: 1.
  • State v. Valento 405 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Valento 405 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    -39 (Minn.1978), the supreme court further articulated the standard for unannounced searches: First, when police seeking a search warrant have reason to believe that an unannounced entry will be required in order to successfully and safely execute the warrant, they must inform the issuing magistrate of the circums
  • State v. Krech 403 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Krech 403 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 1987
    We have relied on the fact that a person is using a residence as a drug outlet in contexts unrelated to this one, -40 (Minn.1978) (suggesting that one fact which might justify authorizing an unannounced entry clause in a warrant to search a dwelling is the fact that the dwelling is being used as a drug outlet).
  • State v. Smith 367 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Smith 367 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 1985
    See (holding that technical violation of statutory prohibition of night-time execution of search warrant absent court determination of necessity does not require suppression of evidence seized in otherwise lawful search).
  • State v. Whelan 350 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Whelan 350 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Schinzing 342 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Schinzing 342 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1983
    4.02), (nighttime execution of a search warrant was a statutory, not a constitutional, violation which under the circumstances of the case did not mandate exclusion of the evidence seized).
  • State v. Kochendorfer 304 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1981
  • State v. Kochendorfer 304 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1981
    For a detailed discussion of the law of unannounced entry
  • State v. Felson 299 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Felson 299 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1980
    Our opinion, however, where, although holding that the affidavit did not justify a clause permitting nighttime execution, we held that the trial court nonetheless did not err in denying a motion to suppress because the police acted in good faith in obtaining authorization for a nighttime search and the nighttime search did not
  • State v. Kaminski 293 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Kaminski 293 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1980
    is the leading Minnesota case dealing with nighttime execution of search warrants.
  • State v. Prudhomme 287 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1979
  • State v. Prudhomme 287 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1979
    2 W. LaFave, supra, § 4.8.
  • State v. Yaritz 287 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 1979
  • State v. Yaritz 287 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 1979
    In this regard, see, (refusing to suppress evidence in a case in which the nighttime execution of the search warrant was a statutory, not a constitutional, violation).
  • State v. Summers 265 N.W.2d 841 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Summers 265 N.W.2d 841 Minn. 1978
    This appeal from a pretrial suppression order was consolidated for decision with the appeal in State v. Lien, Minn., filed herewith.