Cited by

“Police may arrest a felony suspect without a warrant in any public place provided they have probable cause.” (footnote omitted), rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

Barre argues the officer lacked probable cause to search his vehicle, rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

“[W]e look to the information that police took into consideration when making the arrest, not what they uncovered thereafter.” rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

7 “Police may arrest a felony suspect without a warrant in any public place provided they have probable cause.” (footnote omitted), rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

To be relied upon by law enforcement, the information must have “sufficient indicia of reliability.”

A CI may supply this information directly by first-hand information or indirectly “through self-verifying details that allow an inference that the information was gained in a reliable way and is not merely based on a suspect’s general reputation or on a casual rumor circulating in the criminal underworld.” (applying this analysis to case involving CRI rather than CI).

“Police may arrest a felony suspect without a warrant in any public place provided they have probable cause.” (footnote omitted), rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

“Assessment of the CRI’s basis of knowledge involves consideration of the quantity and quality of detail in the CRI’s report and whether police independently verified important details of the informant’s report.” rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

“When determining the legality of a warrantless arrest, we look to the information that police took into consideration when making the arrest, not what they uncovered thereafter.” rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

does not by itself establish probable cause.” State v. Cook , rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

-68 (Minn. App. 2000), rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

rev. denied (Minn. July 25, 2000), in which this court concluded that a warrantless arrest was not supported by probable cause, in part because law-enforcement officers “did no independent corroboration other than to verify that the vehicle described by the CRI was parked in the YMCA lot and tha

at 304 (citing State v. Cook , review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000)).

Therefore, the officers had reasonable, articulable suspicion that Cunningham was the person described by the informant who attempted to get into a closed store, displayed a firearm, and pointed it at a car.2 Cunningham also argues that, based on our holding in State v. Cook , d 664, 668 (Minn. App. 2000), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000), the police corroborated insufficient details to establish reasonable suspicion.

’” (), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

Appellant relies on State v. Cook , review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000), to argue that the corroboration here is insufficient because police needed to corroborate the incriminating aspects of the CI’s tip.

(stating an informant may supply first -hand information if he has purchased drugs from a suspect in the past), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

State v. Cook , review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

mation, such as when a CRI states that he purchased drugs from a suspect or saw a suspect selling drugs to another,” or it may be “supplied indirectly through self -verifying details that allow a n inference that the information was gained in a reliable way and is not merely based on a suspect’s general reputation or on a casual rumor circulating in the criminal underworld.” State v. Cook , review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

(quotation and citations omitted), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

d reliability factor, police corroboration of a CRI’s information, Palmer relies on State v. Cook, in which this court held that a CRI’s information did not establish probable cause to conduct a warrantless felony arrest “because the informant never claimed he observed the suspect committing a crime and the informant provided non-incriminating details easily obtainable by the general public.” review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

Gates, 462 U.S. at 238, 103 S. Ct. at 233 2; , review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

“Police may arrest a felony suspect without a warrant in any public place provided they have probable cause.” State v. Cook

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

See, review denied (Minn. June 16, 2004)

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

d 664, 667-68 (Minn. App. 2000), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000) (evaluating probable cause based on an informant’s tip).

review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

A police officer may rely on a CRI’s tip to determine that probable cause exists “if the tip has sufficient indicia of reliability.” (citation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

Police may rely on a confidential informant’s tip to conclude that probable cause exists, “if the tip has sufficient indicia of reliability.” (), review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).

Basis of Knowledge An informant’s basis of knowledge “may be supplied directly, by first-hand information,” or “indirectly through self-verifying details that allow an inference that the information was gained in a reliable way and is not merely based on a suspect’s general reputation or on a casual rumor circulating in the criminal underworld.” review denied (Minn. July 25, 2000).