Cited by

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

105 citing documents.

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.
State v. Henning 666 N.W.2d 379 Minn. 2003
State v. Syhavong 661 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Syhavong 661 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(holding evidence must be suppressed where “investigative questioning, consent inquiry, and subsequent search went beyond the scope of the traffic stop and was unsupported by any reasonable articulable suspicion”).