Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. Derek Lawrence Stavish, 868 N.W.2d 670.

82 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Allen Giles Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Richard LeBre Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Stavish , -75 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Isaac Thomas Soltau Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. DeAntae Demond Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Paige Jean Lofberg Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Chris Becerra Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Ries v. State 920 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 2018
Ries v. State 920 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 2018
State v. Stavish , , 675 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Steven David Schultz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Verhein v. Piper 917 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Larold Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Donald Charles Ancke Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Gideon Wesseh Chea Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Trousil Minn. Ct. App. 2017
After the Supreme Court decided McNeely, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld a
State of Minnesota v. Adam Blaine Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Adam Blaine Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jose Amador Molina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jose Amador Molina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(noting in a CVO case that prior to Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), Minnesota law permitted law enforcement to rely on Minn. Stat. § 169A.51, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Edward Reps Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Edward Reps Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“A pretrial order may be appealed only when the State shows the district court’s alleged error, unless reversed, will have a critical impact on the outcome of the trial.” (quotation omitted).
Tyler Lee Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 887 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Tyler Lee Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 887 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
it was objectively reasonable for the officer to conclude that he or she was faced with an emergency, in which the delay necessary to obtain a warrant would significantly undermine the efficacy of the search.” d 670, 676-77 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Todd Eugene Trahan 886 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Todd Eugene Trahan 886 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 2016
(noting that in determining whether exigent circumstances justified a warrantless blood draw, we review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error but review the district court’s “ultimate determination of exigency de novo”).
State of Minnesota v. Debra Lee Fawcett 884 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Debra Lee Fawcett 884 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 2016
(“[C]ritical impact is established if the exclusion of evidence would prevent the State from successfully prosecuting one of the specific charges.”).
State of Minnesota v. Heather Leann Horst 880 N.W.2d 24 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Heather Leann Horst 880 N.W.2d 24 Minn. 2016
Missouri v. McNeely, ___ 11 U.S. ___, ___, 133 S. Ct. 1552, 1559 (2013) (citing Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326, 331 (2001))
State of Minnesota v. Alan David Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Debra Lee Fawcett 877 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Alan David Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Debra Lee Fawcett 877 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 2016