Cited by

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

287 citing documents.

Tara Kay O'Connor v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Gregory Charles Van Schoonhoven v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Gregory Charles Van Schoonhoven v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Warrantless searches are unreasonable unless an exception to the warrant requirement applies, and consent is an exception to the warrant requirement.
State of Minnesota v. Stephanie Evon Glover Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Stephanie Evon Glover Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Paul Richard Dehn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Paul Richard Dehn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When reviewing a pretrial order denying a motion to suppress evidence, this court “review[s] the facts to determine whether, as a matter of law, the court erred when it failed to suppress the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. William Robert Bernard, Jr. 859 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. William Robert Bernard, Jr. 859 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Tommy Salyers, III 858 N.W.2d 156 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Tommy Salyers, III 858 N.W.2d 156 Minn. 2015
at 216; -62 (Minn. 2007) (holding that a jury instruction was erroneous because it stated that knowing possession “may be inferred if the firearm was in a place under [the accused’s] exclusive control” but did not “instruct the jury that it was not required to accept that the inference [of knowledge] necessarily follow
State of Minnesota v. Chris William Savage Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Chris William Savage Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Police officers may “stop and frisk a person when (1) they have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that a suspect might be engaged in criminal activity and (2) the officer reasonably believes the suspect might be armed and dangerous.” (d 840, 843 (Minn. 1992), aff’d, 508 U.S. 366, 113 S. Ct. 2130 (1993)).
State of Minnesota v. Yee Leng Vue Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Yee Leng Vue Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Todd Timothy Clark Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Todd Timothy Clark Minn. Ct. App. 2014
However, “‘by virtue of the special training they receive, police officers articulating a reasonable suspicion may make 6 inferences and deductions that might well elude an untrained person.’” Smith, d at 352 (–52 (Minn. 2007)).
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Daniel Hughes Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Donald Wallace Butler Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Daniel Hughes Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we review 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. Donald Wallace Butler Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When reviewing a pretrial order denying a motion to suppress 3 evidence, this court “review[s] the facts to determine whether, as a matter of law, the court erred when it failed to suppress the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
See, e.g., Lemert, d at 232 n.3 (describing case in which supreme court “held that the police unlawfully seized the driver of a truck when they stopped the truck”); (stating that “[t]he officers stopped the car”); –44 (Minn. 2007) (referring to “[t]he two officers who stopped [a vehicle driven by defendant],” both of whom were in same squad car); cf. Conaway, d at 39 (reasoning that “in the context of a suppression motion, the question is whether the law enforcement system as a whole has complie
State of Minnesota v. Maurice Lee Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Maurice Lee Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Marilyn Jean VanOverbeke v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Marilyn Jean VanOverbeke v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Elson Randall Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Elson Randall Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Chris Gregerson v. Hennepin County and Tracey Martin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Chris Gregerson v. Hennepin County and Tracey Martin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“A search conducted without a warrant issued upon probable cause is generally unreasonable.” d 239, 248 (Minn. 2007).
State of Minnesota v. Greer Elizabeth Dempster Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Greer Elizabeth Dempster Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Ronaldo Earl Rounds Minn. Ct. App. 2014
William Edwin Bredenbeck v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Ronaldo Earl Rounds Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Under this exception, police may search a motor vehicle without a warrant “[w]hen probable cause exists to believe that a vehicle contains contraband.”
William Edwin Bredenbeck v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Amanda Elizabeth Walz v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Jean Fouquette Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Jean Fouquette Minn. Ct. App. 2014
d 239, 248 (Minn. 2007).
Amanda Elizabeth Walz v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Kevin Charles O'Brien v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Boelz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Becky Ann Rice Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Terry Gene Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Kevin Charles O'Brien v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Boelz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An appellate court “will not hesitate to order a new trial when the state, intentionally or unintentionally, elicits information ruled to be inadmissible and we conclude that information is prejudicial to the defendant.”
State of Minnesota v. Becky Ann Rice Minn. Ct. App. 2014
IV; Minn. Const. art. I, § 10
State of Minnesota v. Terry Gene Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Landon Ricky Olesiak v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014