Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Flowers, 734 N.W.2d 239.

287 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Marcia Jean Schlingmann Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Maureen Ndidiamaka Onyelobi 879 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Maureen Ndidiamaka Onyelobi 879 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jayson Stanley Sam Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jayson Stanley Sam Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Deundrick Demon McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Deundrick Demon McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tony Luke Fisher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tony Luke Fisher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. William Martin Odette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. William Martin Odette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Faith Annette Jenson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Justin Glenn Joecks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(concluding that “suspicious movements” in the vehicle gave officers reasonable suspicion that defendant might have been armed and dangerous); Dickerson, 10 d at 843 (stating that evasive conduct may give rise to reasonable suspicion).
State of Minnesota v. Justin Glenn Joecks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION When reviewing a pretrial ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, an appellate court “review[s] the facts to determine whether, as a matter of law, the [district] court erred when it failed to suppress the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Faith Annette Jenson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
When reviewing a pretrial ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, an appellate court “review[s] the facts to determine whether, as a matter of law, the [district] court erred when it failed to suppress the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Because police officers receive special training, in the course of 7 articulating reasonable suspicion they “may make inferences and deductions that might well elude an untrained person.” -52 (Minn. 2007).
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Alan Early Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Alan Early Minn. Ct. App. 2016
n.16 (Minn. 2007) (providing examples of police actions not resulting in de facto arrests).
State of Minnesota v. Carl Raba Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Carl Raba Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Iri Armando Ruiz-Deleon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Erik Edward Malmquist Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Erik Edward Malmquist Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Iri Armando Ruiz-Deleon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Generally, “once a Terry search has determined that the suspect is not armed, the police may not without probable cause once again search the suspect.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Patrick Lamar Mobley Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Patrick Lamar Mobley Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Appellate courts “consider the totality of the circumstances when determining whether reasonable, articulable suspicion exists.”
State of Minnesota v. Elliott Patrick Ketz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Lee Weseman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Lee Weseman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
And “police officers articulating a reasonable suspicion may make inferences and deductions that might well elude an untrained person.” -52 (Minn. 2007).
State of Minnesota v. Elliott Patrick Ketz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Case Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Case Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(concluding “suspicious movements” in vehicle gave officers reasonable suspicion defendant might have been armed and dangerous); (stating that evasive conduct may give rise to reasonable suspicion).
State of Minnesota v. Logan Nicholas Clay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Jill Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Jill Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Logan Nicholas Clay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(clarifying that probable cause is a test of reasonableness that applies regardless of the amount of marijuana that the vehicle’s occupants actually possesses), aff’d
State of Minnesota v. Paul Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Paul Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Chad William Mosher v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Chad William Mosher v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ricardo Leonard Bowman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ricardo Leonard Bowman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When the facts are not in dispute, [an appellate court’s] review is de novo, and [it] must determine whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.”
State of Minnesota v. Craig Ryan Schwoboda Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Craig Ryan Schwoboda Minn. Ct. App. 2015
However, an officer may not conduct a stop based on a 4 “hunch” or an “inchoate and unparticularized suspicion.” d 239, 252 (Minn. 2007) (quotation omitted); see also Harris, d at 99.
Tara Kay O'Connor v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015