Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Lemieux, 726 N.W.2d 783.

71 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
n.2 (Minn. 2014) (applying collective-knowledge doctrine on review of legality of pat search); (applying collective-knowledge doctrine on review of legality of emergency-aid search of residence); (applying collective-knowledge doctrine on review of legality of arrest).
State of Minnesota v. Zacarias Lopez Sarmiento Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Zacarias Lopez Sarmiento Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Generally, there must be some level of communication between the police force, although “[a]ctual communication of information to the officer conducting the search [or arrest] is unnecessary.”
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Irving Stevenson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Irving Stevenson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error, and its decision whether to suppress the evidence de novo, State v. Harris
Stephanie Ann Keim v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Stephanie Ann Keim v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(imputing knowledge of officers involved in a search when some degree of communication existed between officers).
State v. Jacot 330 P.3d 981 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
The court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error, id., but the de novo standard applies to the application of the facts to the Fourth Amendment
Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Co. 832 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2013
State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
(noting that burglary of a dwelling should not be deemed a purely property offense, because it carries with it the possibility of violence and risk to personal safety such that it creates a "special danger to human life”); -90 (Minn.2007); (observing that, depending on the facts, burglary can be considered a "person offense” as opposed to a "property offense” for the purpose of calculating sentences under the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines) (citation omitted).
State v. Jordan 742 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2007
State v. Jordan 742 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2007
See, -11 (Minn.2005) (holding that a tenant has an expectation of privacy in a self-storage unit and suppressing evidence seized in the search without requiring that the defendant be present at the time of the search); 790 (Minn.2007) (holding that the warrantless search was legal because it was justified by the emergency-aid exception, but assuming that the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in “his own abode” despite the fact he was *157 not present during the search).
State v. Morin 736 N.W.2d 691 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Morin 736 N.W.2d 691 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
1371, 1380 , 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980)
In Re the Welfare of J.W.L. 732 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re the Welfare of J.W.L. 732 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
1943, 1947 , 164 L.Ed.2d 650 (2006); -90 (Minn.2007) (addressing community-caretaking function and emergency-aid search).