Cited by

State v. Williams , 1 (Minn. 2011).

Appellate courts “ordinarily do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal, even when those issues are constitutional questions of criminal procedure or are 4 challenges to the constitutionality of a statute.” State v. Williams , (“The law is clear in Minnesota that the constitutionality of a statute cannot be challenged for the first time on appeal.” (quotation omitted)).

When the facts are undisputed, as they are here, “we review a pretrial order on a motion to suppress de novo and ‘determine whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.’” (-48 (Minn. 2007)).

4 DECISION I. Expansion of the Traffic Stop “When facts are not in dispute, as here, we review a pretrial order on a motion to suppress de novo and determine whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.” State v. Williams , (quotation omitted).

“A warrantless arrest is reasonable if supported by probable cause.”

Probable cause exists if “a person of ordinary care and prudence, viewing the totality of circumstances objectively, would entertain an honest and strong suspicion that a specific individual has committed a crime.” (emphasis omitted) (quotation omitted).

“When facts are not in dispute,” this court reviews “a pretrial order on a motion to suppress de novo and determine[s] whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.” (quotation omitted).

When the facts are not in dispute, as here, appellate courts “review a pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence de novo and ‘determine whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.’” ().

Appellate courts generally do not “consider issues raised for the first time on appeal.”

Probable cause requires “something more than mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.”

“Probable cause requires something more than mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for co nviction.”

“Probable cause to arrest exists when a person of ordinary care and prudence, viewing the totality of circumstances objectively, would entertain an honest and strong suspicion that a specific individual has committed a crime.” d 867, 871 (Minn. 2011) (quotation omitted).

at issue.” (quotation omitted).

-75 (Minn. 2011) (concluding that the interests of justice did not require the court to consider a constitutional challenge that the appellant raised for the first time on appeal).

Probable cause requires “something more than mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.”

There is probable cause to support a warrantless arrest if “a person of ordinary care and prudence, viewing the totality of circumstances objectively, would entertain an honest and strong suspicion that a specific individual has committed a crime.” (quotation omitted).

“A warrantless arrest is reasonable if supported by probable cause.”

Generally, appellate courts “do not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal.”

-73, 875 (Minn. 2011) (explaining that a permit is an affirmative defense to an unlawful-possession offense, but the absence of a permit is not an element).

Probable cause to arrest exists when a reasonable person, viewing the circumstances objectively, “would entertain an honest and strong suspicion that a specific individual has committed a crime.” d 867, 871 (Minn. 2011) (quotation and emphasis omitted).

Whether probable cause exists is an objective inquiry that requires courts to consider the totality of the circumstances and facts, -72 (Minn. 2011), including “reasonable inferences that police officers draw from facts, based on their training and experience,”

“Probable cause requires something more than mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.”

“A warrantless arrest is reasonable if supported by probable cause.”

Probable cause requires more than “mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.” ().

belief that a person ’s conduct satisfies the elements of an offense, accounting for such factors as the source, nature, and reliability of the information upon which the officer bases his or her suspicion or belief.”

we review a pretrial order on a motion to suppress de novo and determine whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.” (quotation omitted).

“Probable cause requires something more than mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.”

IV; Minn. Const. art. I, § 10

“The inquiry is objective, and the existence of probable cause depends on all of the facts of each individual case.”

Again, “[a] warrantless 5 arrest is reasonable if supported by probable cause.”