Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Sorenson, 441 N.W.2d 455.

166 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Esteban J. Ramos, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“Usually, we will not decide issues which are not first addressed by the trial court and are raised for the first time on appeal .
State of Minnesota v. Stephen Charles Iepson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Stephen Charles Iepson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(recognizing appellate court’s discretion to consider new issues “when the interests of justice require their consideration and addressing them would not work an unfair surprise on a party”).
State of Minnesota v. Jerome Deshawn Misters Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jerome Deshawn Misters Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(“Usually, we will not decide issues which are not first addressed by the trial court and are raised for the first time on appeal even if the issues involve constitutional questions regarding criminal procedure.”).
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Irving Stevenson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Irving Stevenson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Milton 821 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 2012
State v. Milton 821 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 2012
We have said that the constitutional “protections against unreasonable search and seizures extend to the curtilage of a home.”
State v. Berrios 788 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Berrios 788 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(“Usually, we will not decide issues which are not first addressed by the [district] court and are raised for the first time on appeal even if the issues involve constitutional questions regarding criminal procedure.”).
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Wiskow 774 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Wiskow 774 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Gauster 752 N.W.2d 496 Minn. 2008
Ashby v. State 752 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 2008
State v. Gauster 752 N.W.2d 496 Minn. 2008
Ashby v. State 752 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 2008
(“[W]e will not decide issues * * * raised for the first time on appeal even if the issues involve constitutional questions regarding criminal procedure.”).
State v. Lemmer 736 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
State v. Lemmer 736 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
Powers v. State 731 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 2007
Powers v. State 731 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 2007
We are “most reluctant” to address issues that were not raised at the district court, and we choose not to do so here.
State v. Polsfuss 720 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Polsfuss 720 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
(stating that this court generally will not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal).
State v. Osborne 715 N.W.2d 436 Minn. 2006
State v. Barnes 713 N.W.2d 325 Minn. 2006
State v. Barnes 713 N.W.2d 325 Minn. 2006
State v. Kouba 709 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Kouba 709 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
(in general, defendant who does not raise an issue in district court waives right to raise issue on appeal); (appellate court can consider constitutional issues not raised to district court when required in interest of justice, when parties
State v. Henderson 706 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 2005
State v. Henderson 706 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 2005
State v. Allen 706 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2005
State v. Allen 706 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2005
State v. Hannon 703 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 2005
State v. Hannon 703 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 2005
State v. Franklin 692 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Franklin 692 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In Re the Welfare of T.C.J. 689 N.W.2d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re the Welfare of T.C.J. 689 N.W.2d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Vance 685 N.W.2d 713 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Vance 685 N.W.2d 713 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(declining to address constitutional issue not fully briefed and not litigated in district court).
State v. Benniefield 678 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 2004
State v. Benniefield 678 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 2004
State v. Ornelas 675 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 2004
State v. Ornelas 675 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 2004
Generally, “this court is most reluctant to address issues that have not been raised at the lower courts.”
Johnson v. State 673 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 2004
Johnson v. State 673 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 2004