Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Storvick, 428 N.W.2d 55.

73 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
First, we consider Phillippi’s driving conduct as “strong evidence of negligently inattentive driving,” which can contribute to probable cause because such evidence “often is explained by the defendant’s being under the influence.” d 55, 60 (Minn. 1988).
State of Minnesota v. Heather Marie Mangen Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Heather Marie Mangen Minn. Ct. App. 2025
See Paul, d at 267 ( (vehicular-homicide suspect informed officer that he drank alcohol after arriving home)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The correct approach in a case where the facts are not significantly in dispute is to simply analyze the testimony of the officers and determine if, as a matter of law, the officers were justified under the cases in doing what they did.” n.1 (Minn. 1988).
State of Minnesota v. Adam Blaine Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Adam Blaine Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(noting that a collision involving a pedestrian and a driver suspected of drinking that occurred at approximately 9:00 p.m.
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
We were even more explicit in rejecting a decided two years later.
Neil Douglas Rollins v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Neil Douglas Rollins v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[I]n a case where the facts are not significantly in dispute [appellate courts] simply analyze the testimony of the officers and determine if, as a matter of law, the officers were justified under the cases in doing what they did.” n.1 (Minn. 1988); See also Berge v. Comm’r of Pub.
State v. Shriner 751 N.W.2d 538 Minn. 2008
State v. Strandness 684 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Strandness 684 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
in doing what they did.” , 58 n. 1 (Minn.1988).
Chafoulias v. Peterson 668 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2003
Chafoulias v. Peterson 668 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2003
State v. Houston 654 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Houston 654 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Harris, d at 98 ( , 58 n. 1 (Minn.1988)).
State v. Johnson 645 N.W.2d 505 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Johnson 645 N.W.2d 505 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Harris 590 N.W.2d 90 Minn. 1999
State v. Harris 590 N.W.2d 90 Minn. 1999
State v. Lee 585 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1998
State v. Lee 585 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1998
State v. Campbell 581 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Campbell 581 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Storvick,, , 58 n. 1 (Minn.1988).
State v. Paul 548 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 1996
State v. Paul 548 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 1996
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. Paul 536 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Paul 536 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
County of Hennepin v. Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local 19 527 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1995
County of Hennepin v. Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local 19 527 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1995
However, this court has held that “the expectation of privacy that one has in one’s residence is the core expectation or interest protected by the Fourth Amendment and we are and will be hesitant in finding exigent circumstances for warrantless entries of dwellings.”
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.
State v. Dunagan 521 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1994
State v. Dunagan 521 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1994
demonstrating some of the inferences that can be drawn from objective facts such as these.
State v. Christiansen 515 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Christiansen 515 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Schauer 501 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Schauer 501 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Negaard v. Commissioner of Public Safety 500 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Negaard v. Commissioner of Public Safety 500 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
1371, 1380 , 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980)
State v. Tilleskjor 488 N.W.2d 327 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Tilleskjor 488 N.W.2d 327 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Hanson 488 N.W.2d 511 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Hanson 488 N.W.2d 511 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Saffeels 484 N.W.2d 429 Minn. Ct. App. 1992