Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Harris, 590 N.W.2d 90.

495 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Khong Meng Kong Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Khong Meng Kong Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.”
Jarrod Dwayne Miller v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that a person is seized if, in view of the surrounding circumstances, a reasonable person would believe he or she was not free to disregard the police or terminate the encounter).
State of Minnesota v. Tony Luke Fisher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tony Luke Fisher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Not all encounters between the police and citizens constitute seizures.”
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Scott Welch Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Scott Welch Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nicole Renaye Kroells Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION “When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jimmy Dawayne Lester 874 N.W.2d 768 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jimmy Dawayne Lester 874 N.W.2d 768 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Gary Zurek Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Gary Zurek Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION “When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Alan Early Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Alan Early Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION I. “When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Carl Raba Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Carl Raba Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Deon Sinkfield, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Andrew Joseph Sauter v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Deon Sinkfield, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(d 90, 98 (Minn. 1999)).
Andrew Joseph Sauter v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rita Dolores Illi v. Commissioner of Public Safety 873 N.W.2d 149 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rita Dolores Illi v. Commissioner of Public Safety 873 N.W.2d 149 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. William Joseph Rurup Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael James Parkin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael James Parkin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution protect “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, paper, and effects, 3 against unreasonable searches and seizures.” “Not all encounters between the police and citizens constitute seizures.”
State of Minnesota v. William Joseph Rurup Minn. Ct. App. 2015
3 DECISION “When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in its ruling.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Iri Armando Ruiz-Deleon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Iri Armando Ruiz-Deleon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
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. Richard Joseph Wollenberg Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Richard Joseph Wollenberg Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Perry Richardson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Perry Richardson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Charles Edward Gorgol Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Charles Edward Gorgol Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error, 4 (Minn. 2007), and its decision whether to suppress the evidence as a matter of law
State of Minnesota v. Joseph John West, IV Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Larry Dusaun Gray Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joseph John West, IV Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Larry Dusaun Gray Minn. Ct. App. 2015
DECISION “When reviewing pretrial orders on motions to suppress evidence, [appellate courts] may independently review the facts and determine, as a matter of law, whether the district court erred in suppressing—or not suppressing—the evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Ricardo Leonard Bowman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ricardo Leonard Bowman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Not all encounters between the police and citizens constitute seizures.”
State of Minnesota v. Craig Ryan Schwoboda Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Craig Ryan Schwoboda Minn. Ct. App. 2015
the evidence.” -18 (Minn. 2003).
STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Kyle Dean McCLAIN, Appellant 862 N.W.2d 717 Minn. Ct. App. 2015