Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District v. Horner, 617 N.W.2d 789.

51 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Devondre Demont Pike Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jhonathan Jontae Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Devondre Demont Pike Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jhonathan Jontae Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Probable cause requires more than “mere suspicion but less than the evidence necessary for conviction.” ().
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Jerrod Malachy Feist, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State v. Horner , ; Snyder v. Comm’r of Pub.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“P robable cause to arrest exists where the objective fac ts are such that under the circumstances a person of ordinary care and prudence would entertain an honest and strong suspicion that a crime has been committed.” State v. Horner , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(conducting a de novo revi ew of whether probable cause to arrest existed).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
I. Xiong first argues that “[t]he state presented no evidence that [Trooper Krause] was a licensed peace officer , and so she had no power to conduct a traffic stop or a DWI investigation.” Xiong relies on State v. Horner , -94 (Minn. 2000).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Davis Schultz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Davis Schultz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr. 887 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr. 887 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 2016
(conducting a de novo review of the legal issue of whether probable cause to arrest existed); Edrozo, d at 723-26 (conducting an independent review and reaching our own legal conclusions with respect to the admissibility of the defendant’s statements to police).
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Scott Leithe Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Scott Leithe Minn. Ct. App. 2016
v. Horner, (alteration omitted) (quotations omitted).
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
Therefore, an appellate court must give “due weight” to reasonable 6 inferences drawn by police officers and to a district court’s “finding that the officer was credible and the inference was reasonable.” Ornelas, 517 U.S. at 699-700; Lee, d at 382-83.
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Hartshorn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Anthony Hartshorn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But improvident remarks attributed to counsel are not evidence and not a part of the stipulated facts that comprise the record before us. 5 (quotation omitted); (Page, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (“The fact that there may be other reasons for [a person’s] bloodshot eyes does not mean that his bloodshot eyes do not support probable cause.”).
James Fletcher Cameron v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
James Fletcher Cameron v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Troy Kenneth Scheffler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Troy Kenneth Scheffler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Shawnti Tramayne Fleming Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Shawnti Tramayne Fleming Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Prtine 799 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 2011
State v. Prtine 799 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 2011
v. Horner, (“The question is whether there was objective probable cause, not whether [the officer] subjectively thought there was probable cause.”).
State v. Koppi 798 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 2011
State v. Koppi 798 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 2011
v. Horner, (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
State v. Williams 794 N.W.2d 867 Minn. 2011
State v. Williams 794 N.W.2d 867 Minn. 2011
119 n. 9 (Minn.1999) (citing State v. Fish, 280 Minn. 163, 169 , ).
Mertins v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 755 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Mertins v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 755 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. King 690 N.W.2d 397 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. King 690 N.W.2d 397 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Kier 678 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Kier 678 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Laducer 676 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Laducer 676 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Chafoulias v. Peterson 668 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2003
Chafoulias v. Peterson 668 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2003
State v. Vereb 643 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Vereb 643 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
“While probable cause requires something more than mere suspicion [of criminal activity], it requires less than the evidence necessary for conviction.”
State v. Olson 634 N.W.2d 224 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Olson 634 N.W.2d 224 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(probable cause); (search).
State v. Sherbrooke 633 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 2001