Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Flom, 285 N.W.2d 476.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Seeman’s practice of storing s tolen vehicles on his property, coupled with the logical inference that a person ordinarily would keep stolen items on his property, suggests that Seeman was storing the 2008 Harley-Davidson on his prope rty and that i t was the same motorcycle that the son saw under the stairs.
-
State of Minnesota, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
rolled buy from defendant occurred); –13 (Minn. 1982) (concluding 11 that probable cause was not stale after gap of four weeks between observation of stolen traffic signs and search); Yaritz, d at 17 (concluding that six-day delay between issuance of search warrant and execution was reasonable based on information of drug sales); (concluding that probable cause was not stale even after passage of several months when items sought were of “enduring utility to their taker ”); King, d at 40 1–02 (co
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
But even stolen items that are “easily transferable” may be “of enduring utility to their taker” such that he might keep “one of the items for personal use.”
- State of Minnesota v. Joshua Nathan Benvie, Appellant.. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Joshua Nathan Benvie, Appellant.. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State v. Plantin 682 N.W.2d 653 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
-
State v. Plantin
682 N.W.2d 653
Minn. Ct. App. 2004
at 127-128 -78 (Minn.1979).
- State v. Sanders 598 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
-
State v. Sanders
598 N.W.2d 650
Minn. 1999
Typically, “the failure to object to a prosecutor’s statement forfeits a defendant’s right to have the issue considered on appeal.” Atkins, d at 647 ; -78 (Minn.1979).
- State v. Ives 568 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1997
- State v. Ives 568 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1997
- State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
-
State v. Whittaker
568 N.W.2d 440
Minn. 1997
(citations omitted); see, -78 (Minn.1979).
- State v. DeWald 463 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1990
-
State v. DeWald
463 N.W.2d 741
Minn. 1990
Probable cause has been held not stale even after the passage of several months where the items sought are of “enduring utility to their taker.”
- State v. Garcia 374 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Garcia 374 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Jannetta 355 N.W.2d 189 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-
State v. Jannetta
355 N.W.2d 189
Minn. Ct. App. 1984
36 , 46 L.Ed.2d 39 (1976); and whether the property would have enduring utility
- State v. Parker 353 N.W.2d 122 Minn. 1984
- State v. Parker 353 N.W.2d 122 Minn. 1984
- Novak v. State 349 N.W.2d 830 Minn. 1984
- State v. Ture 353 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1984
- State v. Ture 353 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1984
-
Novak v. State
349 N.W.2d 830
Minn. 1984
Minnesota cases dealing with the issue of probable cause to believe that items will be found in a search of a particular place include:
- Wensman v. State 342 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1984
- Wensman v. State 342 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1984
- State v. Doyle 336 N.W.2d 247 Minn. 1983
-
State v. Doyle
336 N.W.2d 247
Minn. 1983
(in sale-of-contraband case some additional fact is needed to support inference that seller stores contraband at his residence; that was provided by fact that during two controlled buys of drugs from the defendant, the defendant was observed on each occasion going straight from his house to the place where the sales occurred); (affidavit established probable cause to believe that stolen goods would be found at the defendant’s residence where a large *251 number of items were involved, items were
- Gerdes v. State 319 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1982
-
Gerdes v. State
319 N.W.2d 710
Minn. 1982
Probable cause has been held not stale even after the passage of several months where the items sought are of “enduring utility to their taker.”
- State v. Spaulding 296 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1980
- State v. Spaulding 296 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1980