Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Bunce, 669 N.W.2d 394.

18 citing documents.

City of Brooklyn Park, a Municipal Corporation v. Michael G. Doleman Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Alex Jeffrey Mayer v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In addition, courts look to an o fficer’s representations and omissions , State v. Bunce , , review denied (Minn. 2003), and whether a suspect understood the representations and statements of the requesting officer , State v. Barajas
State of Minnesota v. Todd Alexander Gunther Minn. Ct. App. 2019
someone’s safety may be in question.” (quotation marks omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Derek Ronald Shaw Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Bunce , review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Darnell McDaniels Minn. Ct. App. 2018
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Mary Elizabeth Dunn Minn. Ct. App. 2018
that he needed to enter the home to see respondent as part of a welfare check based on N.R.’s statemen ts that respondent was having difficulties walking.1 “Misrepresentations about the nature of an investigation may be evidence of coercion.” (quoting United States v. Turpin, 707 F.2d 332, 334 (8th Cir. 1983)), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Chakotay Bobbie Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Peter James Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Nelson argues that even if he authorized Officer Anderson to find Al ’s contact information on his phone, such limited volun tary consent “does not authorize indiscriminate rummaging into a person’s possessions.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Lopp Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Lopp Minn. Ct. App. 2015
4 proceeding, requiring strict adherence to rule requirements); (reversing and remanding because defendant failed to personally waive his right to a jury trial before the case was submitted to the district court in a Lothenbach proceeding), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Robert Stephen Mendez Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Robert Stephen Mendez Minn. Ct. App. 2014
13 In State v. Bunce, this court concluded that the district court did not err in determining that consent to search a home was voluntary even though “the officers were armed and persistent in their efforts to question appellant.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Craig 807 N.W.2d 453 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Craig 807 N.W.2d 453 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
See Antrim, d at 69 (trial on stipulated facts); (Lothenbach proceeding), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Rasmussen 749 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Rasmussen 749 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Voss 683 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Voss 683 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
review denied (Minn. 16 Dec.