Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. Corey Joel Eichers, 853 N.W.2d 114.

51 citing documents.

City of Brooklyn Park, a Municipal Corporation, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A search occurs “when an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable is infringed.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(concluding “that the narcotics dog sniff” of a package at the airport “was a search that required reasonable, articulable suspicion that the package contained contraband”), aff’d on other grounds
Christopher Humphrey, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
2 “Although not binding on Minnesota state courts, Eighth Circuit caselaw can be persuasive.” aff’d on other grounds
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“We will not reverse a correct decision by the district court simply because we disagree with its reasoning.” ( ), aff’d on other grounds
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“We will not reverse a correct decision by the district court simply because we disagree with its reasoning.” (), aff’d on other grounds
State of Minnesota v. Seneca Warrior Steeprock Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Seneca Warrior Steeprock Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Starnes Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Starnes Minn. Ct. App. 2024
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
Roula Mitchell v. Target Corporation Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Roula Mitchell v. Target Corporation Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Steven Todd Parker, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
aff’d on other grounds, ; (“We may affirm the district court on any ground, including one not relied on by the district court.”), rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Although only persuasive, 6 federal caselaw states that 6 (addressing authorities from other states and federal courts), review denied (Minn. June 29, 2010); -17 (Minn. App. 2013) (addressing Eighth Circuit in particular), aff’d on other grounds
Minn. 2020
Yia Her, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
To determine whether the suspicion was reasonable, this court applies “an objective, totality-of-the-circumstances test to the articulated and particularized facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure.” (), aff’d on other grounds
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[L]egal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.”
State v. Sam 904 N.W.2d 463 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
City of Golden Valley v. Wiebesick 899 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 2017
James Donald Johnson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“But legal determinations, such 6 as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Catherine Nyree McCabe 890 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Catherine Nyree McCabe 890 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
TCI Business Capital, Inc. v. Five Star American Die Casting, LLC, Brian T. Flynn 890 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Irene Bernice Benjamin Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Irene Bernice Benjamin Minn. Ct. App. 2017
[that] is expressive and inextricably linked to [a] protected message.” Baribeau v. City of Minneapolis, 596 F.3d 465, 477-78 (8th Cir. 2010); (“Although not binding on Minnesota state courts, Eighth Circuit caselaw can be persuasive.”), aff’d on other grounds
State of Minnesota v. Joshua David Gehloff Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joshua David Gehloff Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“When reviewing a district court’s pretrial order on a motion to suppress evidence, the district court’s factual findings are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard.” cert.
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Edward Reps Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Edward Reps Minn. Ct. App. 2016
are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Huy Vu Le Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Huy Vu Le Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In light of the Minnesota Supreme Court’s we disagree and affirm the district court’s order.
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Dwight Liebl 886 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Dwight Liebl 886 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tiffany Nicole Phillips Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tiffany Nicole Phillips Minn. Ct. App. 2016
are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted), cert.
State of Minnesota v. Travis Richard Otto Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Travis Richard Otto Minn. Ct. App. 2016
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted), cert.
State of Minnesota v. Marco Allen Coney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marco Allen Coney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(citation omitted), cert.
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Andrew Faust Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Andrew Faust Minn. Ct. App. 2016
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted), cert.
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Nicole Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Nicole Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. David Ford McMurray 860 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
But legal determinations, such as whether there was a seizure and, if so, whether that seizure was unreasonable, are reviewed de novo.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. George Kimuhu Gatungu Minn. Ct. App. 2014