Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Bradley, 908 N.W.2d 366.

27 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Stephan Issac Roberson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(explaining that a search incident to arrest is a recognized exception to the warrant requirement which allows an officer who has lawfully arrested a person to search “the arrestee’s person” and “the area within the arrestee’ s immediate control”).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Patrick Daly Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Michael Patrick Daly Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(explaining that search incident to arrest is a recognized exception to the warrant requirement which allows an officer who had lawfully arrested a person to search the arrestee’s person and “the area within the arrestee’s immediate control”).
State of Minnesota v. Phoenixx Paislee Raverty Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Unless an exception to the warrant requirement applies, “any evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search or seizure must be suppressed.”
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Sam Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Sam Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Unless an exception applies, “any evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search or seizure must be suppressed.”
State of Minnesota v. Abdirizak Bashir Barre Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“[A]ny evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search or seizure must be suppressed.”
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Laton Ponder Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“[A]ny evidence obtained as a result of an unreasonable search or seizure must be suppressed.”
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Benjamin Stuckey Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Johnathon Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(citing Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. 438, 459-60 (2016)).
State of Minnesota v. Chad Menford Brehmer Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Carlos Raul Orellana Duta Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. John Joseph Hare Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Crystal Ann Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Crystal Ann Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Because “[a]n arrest is lawful if an officer has probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime,” our analysis on this issue is similar to the probable cause issue discussed above.
State of Minnesota v. Otis Redmond Ware Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Otis Redmond Ware Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy James Heller Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Justin Neal Shelton Minn. Ct. App. 2023
When the facts underlying a pretrial order on a motion to suppress are not in dispute, we review de novo “whether the police articulated an adequate basis for the search or seizure at issue.” - 48 (Minn. 2007); d 366, 369 (Minn. App. 2018).
State of Minnesota v. Rebecca Julie Malecha Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“A search incident to a lawful arrest is a well-recognized exception to the warrant requirement under the Fourth Amendment.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Louis Larell Osborne Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Gilbert Miller, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Jennifer Tasha Stiel Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Under this exception, an arres ting officer may search both “( 1) the arrestee’s person, and (2) the area within the arre stee’s immediate control.”
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Allen Giles Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Phillip Joseph Porter Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Paige Jean Lofberg Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Chris Becerra Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 2483– 84 (2014)