Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Fort, 660 N.W.2d 415.

103 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Erik Edward Malmquist Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he scope and duration of a traffic stop investigation must be limited to the justification for the stop.”
State of Minnesota v. Terry Gordon Wurtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Terry Gordon Wurtz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Investigation of any offense beyond that which rendered the initiation of the stop permissible “must be justified by reasonable articulable suspicion of other criminal 5 activity.”
State of Minnesota v. Paul Joseph Hager Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Paul Joseph Hager Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 869 N.W.2d 863 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Lee Weseman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Lee Weseman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Investigation of any other offense “must be justified by reasonable articulable suspicion of other criminal activity.”
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Case Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Case Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-10, 116 S. Ct. 1769, 1772 (1996)
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).
Mitchell Frank Mack v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Ford McMurray 860 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sharleen Leslie Paulson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sharleen Leslie Paulson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Cooper Allen Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Cooper Allen Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
4 (stating that the Minnesota Constitution “requires that each incremental intrusion during a traffic stop be individualized to the person toward whom the intrusion is directed and tied to and justified by one of the following: (1) the
State of Minnesota v. James Irving Dale Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. James Irving Dale Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Daniel Roy Gibbs v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Daniel Roy Gibbs v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Thiel 846 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Thiel 846 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(quoting Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-10 , 116 S.Ct.
State v. Smith 814 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 2012
State v. Smith 814 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 2012
State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
Explained State v. Diede 795 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 2011
State v. Krenik 774 N.W.2d 178 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Ortega 770 N.W.2d 145 Minn. 2009
State v. Ortega 770 N.W.2d 145 Minn. 2009
State v. Ortega 749 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Ortega 749 N.W.2d 851 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Rud v. Fabian 743 N.W.2d 295 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Rud v. Fabian 743 N.W.2d 295 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Jordan 742 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2007
State v. Hussong 739 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Hussong 739 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
See, (holding that officer did not have reasonable articulable suspicion to support request for consent to search).
State v. Burbach 706 N.W.2d 484 Minn. 2005
State v. Burbach 706 N.W.2d 484 Minn. 2005
the district court agreed that the officer’s request to search the vehicle was not supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion, and therefore suppressed the crack cocaine, the pipe, and the urine-test results, and dismissed the drug-related charges.
Kahn v. Griffin 701 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 2005
Kahn v. Griffin 701 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 2005
6 .Carter, Askerooth, (traffic stop confinement in back seat of squad car); (extending detention during a routine traffic stop constitutes a seizure); (short-term social guest in a host’s home had reasonable expectation of privacy); Wiegand, d at 132 (dog sniff of motor vehicle); Harris, (bus passenger not seized under
State v. Mahr 701 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Mahr 701 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Carter 697 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 2005
State v. Carter 697 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 2005
State v. Askerooth 681 N.W.2d 353 Minn. 2004
State v. Askerooth 681 N.W.2d 353 Minn. 2004
State v. Volkman 675 N.W.2d 337 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Volkman 675 N.W.2d 337 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
rejecting the state’s argument that the evidence was admissible because it inevitably would have been discovered during an inventory search of the vehicle.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by