Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. Erica Ann Rohde, 852 N.W.2d 260.

46 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(citing Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371 (1987)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(ordering the suppression of evidence found from a vehicle search because impounding the vehicle was unconstitutional).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See State v. Rohde , (search); (seizure).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State v. Rohde , (“[I]f the impoundment was unreasonable, then the resulting search was also unreasonable.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, 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, Respondent, 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 371, 107 S. Ct. 738, 741 (1987) ; –64 (Minn. 2014).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
IV; Minn. Const. art. I, § 10; d 260, 263 (Minn. 2014).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, ___, 133 S. Ct. 1552, 1558 (2013)
State of Minnesota, Respondent, 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