Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Gauster, 752 N.W.2d 496.

426 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Joshua Alvin Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Adam Lindsay Williams v. Commissioner of Public Safety (A18-0970), State of Minnesota (A18-1103), vs. Adam Lindsay Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Ricky Antoinne Osborne Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, we review the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal 5 determinations de novo.” d 496, 502 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Paul Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Guytrell Edward Hawkins Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Allen Giles Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Derek Ronald Shaw Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State of Minnesota v. Eric Jon Prochnow Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State v. Leonard 923 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Leonard 923 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008).
State of Minnesota v. Shane Michael Wolden Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 496, 502 (Minn. 2008 ).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Thomas Hesch Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Devell Eshawn Warren Minn. Ct. App. 2018
James Willard Francisco v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State of Minnesota v. Justin Lee Ironhawk Minn. Ct. App. 2018
” State v. Gauster , (quotation omitted).
State v. Poehler 921 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Poehler 921 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008).
Ries v. State 920 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 2018
Ries v. State 920 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 2018
See State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008) (discussing Opperman ).
State of Minnesota v. Cabbott James Weyker Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Virgil Timothy Pouliot Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Bryant Estrada Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Ashley Amy Schwartz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.” State v. Gauster
State of Minnesota v. Casimir Robert Krithers Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“This rule is not absolute, however, and we may address an issue in the interests of ju stice if addressing the issue w ill not work an unfair surprise on a party.” State v. Gauster , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Antone Larron Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State of Minnesota v. Trenton John Horn Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreason able.” State v. G auster
State of Minnesota v. Sedrick Lamar Holt Minn. Ct. App. 2018
have probable cause to request Holt submit to a test via the implied consent procedure; and (3) the district court made erroneous factual findings.1 “When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, ‘we r eview the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.’” ().
State v. Brown 915 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Brown 915 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008).
State of Minnesota v. Jordan Lee Downwind Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State v. Gayles 915 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Gayles 915 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Lugo , , 483 (Minn. 2016) ; State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008).
State of Minnesota v. Darryl Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, [appellate courts] review the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.” State v. Gauster , (quotation omitted).
State v. Bradley 908 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Bradley 908 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Gauster , , 502 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Xavier Richard Jamieson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Generally, warrantless searches are per se unreasonable.”
State of Minnesota v. Ryan Ervin Salo Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, [an appellate court] review[s] the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.” State v. Gauster , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. David Michael Bigham Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[W]e review the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.” State v. Gauster
State of Minnesota v. Chakotay Bobbie Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Arnold Dettmann Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Scott Wayne Srnsky Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, [appellate courts] review the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.” State v. Gauster , (quotation omitted) .
State of Minnesota v. Paul Alan Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Shelly Kay Karger Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Steven Ken Le Walton Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371, 107 S. Ct. 738, 741 (1987); South Dakota v. Opperman , 428 U.S. 364, 373, 9 6 S. Ct. 3092, 3099 (1976); State v. Gauster , -10 (Minn. 1977).
State v. Edstrom 901 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Edstrom 901 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, ‘we review the district court’s factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.’ ” ().
State of Minnesota v. Recardo Daryl Meeks Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 496, 502 (Minn. 2008).
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Ann Donarski Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jamaul Anthony Brisco-Turner Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 496, 502 (Minn. 2008).
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy James McNitt Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, [appellate courts] review the district court’s factual findings under a clea rly erroneous standard and the district court’s legal determinations de novo.” (quotation omitted).