Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Day, 461 N.W.2d 404.

27 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Welfare of: P. K. T., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Other circumstances include demonstrations “of authority which one would not expect between two private citizens,” rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
And “this court has found a show of authority sufficient to constitute a seizure where officers asked a person to exit a parked vehicle and approach the officer.” (stating that “it is likely to be a seizure if a person is ordered out of 11 a vehicle, or the police engage in some other action or show of authority which one would not expect between two private citizens”), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Starnes Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Starnes Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A seizure will occur when an officer orders a person out of their vehicle and summons them to “the officer’s squad car to provide identification and to respond to questioning.” rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Sarah Jean Mona Dubinsky Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Sarah Jean Mona Dubinsky Minn. Ct. App. 2023
While Dubinsky suggests that a seizure occurs when police engage in conduct with a citizen beyond the bounds of normal citizen-to-citizen interaction, this suggestion misconstrues the applicable caselaw which provides only that such a situation means a seizure is “likely.”
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Harris, d at 98; (concluding defendant was seized when officer summoned him to the squad car to identify himse lf and respond to questioning) , review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See E.D.J., d at 782-83 (stating that although the police generally may approach an individual and ask questions without seizing that individual, it is a seizure where the police direct the individual to stop); (holding that police officer’s action of “summoning” defendant to “approach the officer’s squad car to provide identification and to respond to questioning” constituted a seizure under the Fourt h Amendment) , review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Dec.
Paul Robert Mix, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Mix argues that Sergeant Kopel lacked specific, articulable facts upon which to seize him.1 When the facts are not significantly in dispute, this court determines as a matter of law “whether the officer’ s actions amounted to a seizure and if the officer had an adequate basis for the seizure.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Distinguished State of Minnesota v. Kevin Earl Westergaard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In State v. Day, we held that “the summoning by the police officer, who was in uniform and armed, requiring appellant to approach the officer’s squad car to provide identification and to respond to questioning, constitutes a restraint and seizure under the fourth amendment.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Klamar 823 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Klamar 823 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(“On the other hand, it is likely *693 to be a seizure if a person is ordered out of a vehicle, or the police engage in some other action or show of authority which one would not expect between two private citizens.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Harris 572 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Harris 572 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
review denied (Minn. Dec.
Kranz v. Commissioner of Public Safety 539 N.W.2d 420 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Kranz v. Commissioner of Public Safety 539 N.W.2d 420 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
( , 58 n. 1 (Minn.1988)), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Hjelmstad 535 N.W.2d 663 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Hjelmstad 535 N.W.2d 663 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
-07 (Minn.App.1990) ("seizure” occurred when officer parked to left of appellant's vehicle at gas pump and summoned appellant to approach him and respond to questioning), pet.
State v. Pfannenstein 525 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Pfannenstein 525 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
58 n. 1 (Minn.1988); pet.
In Re the Welfare of E.D.J. 502 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 1993
In Re the Welfare of E.D.J. 502 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 1993
See, for example, the following court of appeals’ decisions, which we cite only for illustrative purposes *783 and not to suggest that we necessarily agree with everything said therein: (Minn.App.