Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. Erica Ann Rohde, 852 N.W.2d 260.
-
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Dean Grell
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
When, as is the case here, the parties do not dispute the underlying facts, “the constitutionality of the search presents a pure question of law that [appellate courts] review de novo.”
-
State of Minnesota v. Stephanie Hope Smith
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Evidence obtained from an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible.”
- State of Minnesota, Appellant/Cross-Respondent v. Seneca Warrior Steeprock, Respondent/Cross-Appellant Minn. 2025
-
State of Minnesota, Appellant/Cross-Respondent v. Seneca Warrior Steeprock, Respondent/Cross-Appellant
Minn. 2025
“Generally, a search conducted without a warrant is per se unreasonable.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
-
State of Minnesota v. Soloman Hosea Tomas
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(citing Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371 (1987)).
- State of Minnesota v. Sarah Kuichtoch Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-
State of Minnesota v. Laryountae Eugene Taylor
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(ordering the suppression of evidence found from a vehicle search because impounding the vehicle was unconstitutional).
-
State of Minnesota v. Emilio Andres Trevino
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, 148 (2013); -64 (Minn. 2014).
- State of Minnesota v. Raenard Romalle Douglas Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
State of Minnesota v. Raenard Romalle Douglas
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, 148-49 (2013); -99 (Minn. 2012)
- State of Minnesota v. Jebah Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-
State of Minnesota v. Jebah Doe
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
at 502-03; (quotation omitted).
- State of Minnesota v. Nancy Jean Feltus Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- State of Minnesota v. Orlando Omar Castillo Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- State of Minnesota v. Spencer Robert Stiller Minn. Ct. App. 2021
-
State of Minnesota v. Michael Troy Moyer
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See State v. Rohde , (search); (seizure).
- State of Minnesota v. Thomas Eric Walbridge Minn. Ct. App. 2021
- State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gregory Vanguilder Minn. Ct. App. 2020
- State of Minnesota v. Jordan Adrian Walz Minn. Ct. App. 2020
-
State of Minnesota v. Gerardo Cory Lopez
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State v. Rohde , (“[I]f the impoundment was unreasonable, then the resulting search was also unreasonable.”).
-
State of Minnesota v. Kristopher Lee Roybal
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“An impoundment is reasonable if the state’s interest in impounding outweighs the individual’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreas onable searches and seizures.” State v. Rohde , (quotation omitted).
-
State of Minnesota v. Randall Scott Seelye
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
For impoundment of a vehicle to be proper, “the [s]tate must have an interest in impoundment that outweighs the individual’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.” 8 (quotation omitted).
- State v. Brown 932 N.W.2d 283 Minn. 2019
-
State v. Brown
932 N.W.2d 283
Minn. 2019
State v. Rohde , , 263 (Minn. 2014) ("Evidence obtained from an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible."
- State of Minnesota v. Brandyn Lee Hulsebus Minn. Ct. App. 2019
-
State of Minnesota v. Devell Eshawn Warren
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371, 107 S. Ct. 738, 741 (1987) ; –64 (Minn. 2014).
-
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Arnold Dettmann
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
IV; Minn. Const. art. I, § 10; d 260, 263 (Minn. 2014).
-
State of Minnesota v. Steven Ken Le Walton
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, ___, 133 S. Ct. 1552, 1558 (2013)
-
State of Minnesota v. Abel Ricardo Mendoza, III
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In that context, the supreme court has recognized a “caretaking authority to impound a vehicle to protect the defendant’s property from theft and police from claims arising therefrom.” State v. Rohde , (quotations omitted).
- State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Charles Micheal Serna Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Charles Micheal Serna
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
An impoundment is reasonable if the state’s interest in impounding outweighs the individual’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.” (emphasis and quotation omitted).
- State of Minnesota v. Joshua Brandon Cochran Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Brandon Cochran
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[I]f the impoundment was unreasonable, then the resulting search was also unreasonable.” (Rohde II).
- State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Faith Annette Jenson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Faith Annette Jenson
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(quoting Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371, 107 S. Ct. 738, 741 (1987)).
- State of Minnesota v. Tou Vang Pal Lor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Tou Vang Pal Lor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Alex Robert Galvan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Alex Robert Galvan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
State of Minnesota v. Brittney Dominique McKinney
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
the impoundment of Rohde’s vehicle was not justified under the Fourth Amendment.”
- State of Minnesota v. Zacarias Lopez Sarmiento Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- State of Minnesota v. Zacarias Lopez Sarmiento Minn. Ct. App. 2014