Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Carter, 596 N.W.2d 654.
- State of Minnesota v. Deshon Israel Bonnell Minn. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Deshon Israel Bonnell
Minn. 2026
may not contest the legality of the search or seizure.” (emphasis added).
- State of Minnesota v. Stuart Donald Luhm 880 N.W.2d 606 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Stuart Donald Luhm
880 N.W.2d 606
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Minnesota courts apply a two-step analysis to determine whether a defendant has a legitimate expectation of privacy in a particular area.
- State of Minnesota v. David Ford McMurray 860 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Danyelle Raymon Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
State of Minnesota v. Danyelle Raymon Williams
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Although the Minnesota Constitution may be interpreted to afford more protection to its citizens than is provided under the United States Constitution, a decision to interpret the Minnesota Constitution more expansively than the federal constitution should not be made “cavalierly.”
- State of Minnesota v. Erica Ann Rohde 852 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 2014
- State of Minnesota v. Erica Ann Rohde 852 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 2014
- State v. Eichers 840 N.W.2d 210 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
-
State v. Eichers
840 N.W.2d 210
Minn. Ct. App. 2013
“A defendant’s ‘rights to challenge any search under Article I, Section 10 of the *216 Minnesota Constitution are coextensive with [the defendant’s] rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.’ ’” -96 (Minn.2013) ().
- State v. Griffin 834 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 2013
-
State v. Griffin
834 N.W.2d 688
Minn. 2013
A defendant’s “rights to challenge any search under Article I, Section *696 10 of the Minnesota Constitution are coextensive with [the defendant’s] rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
- Carlton v. State 816 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2012
- In Re the Welfare of M.L.M. 781 N.W.2d 381 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
-
In Re the Welfare of M.L.M.
781 N.W.2d 381
Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(interpreting protections under these provisions as co-extensive in the absence of “ ‘radical’ or ‘sharp’ departures” of the United States Supreme Court from its precedent); (recognizing general principle favoring uniformity with the federal co
- State v. Johnson 777 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
-
State v. Johnson
777 N.W.2d 767
Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(interpreting protections under these provisions as co-extensive in the absence of “ ‘radical’ or ‘sharp’ departures” of the United States Supreme Court from its precedent); (recognizing general principle favoring uniformity with the federal co
- State v. Jackson 741 N.W.2d 146 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Jackson 741 N.W.2d 146 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Rodriguez 738 N.W.2d 422 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Rodriguez 738 N.W.2d 422 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Mohs 726 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Mohs 726 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Gail 713 N.W.2d 851 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Gail
713 N.W.2d 851
Minn. 2006
In 1999, we held “that appellants’ rights to challenge any search under Article I, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution are coextensive with appellants’ rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” (Carter II).
- Kahn v. Griffin 701 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 2005
-
Kahn v. Griffin
701 N.W.2d 815
Minn. 2005
Carter, Harris, d at 97 ; Johnson, d at 405.
- State v. Askerooth 681 N.W.2d 353 Minn. 2004
- State v. Askerooth 681 N.W.2d 353 Minn. 2004
- State v. Colosimo 669 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2003
- State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
- State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
- State v. Sletten 664 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
-
State v. Sletten
664 N.W.2d 870
Minn. Ct. App. 2003
See, (holding short-term business guests engaged in illegal drug transactions lack legitimate expectation of privacy).
- In Re the Welfare of B.R.K. 658 N.W.2d 565 Minn. 2003
- In Re the Welfare of B.R.K. 658 N.W.2d 565 Minn. 2003
- State v. Wiegand 645 N.W.2d 125 Minn. 2002
- State v. Wiegand 645 N.W.2d 125 Minn. 2002
- State v. Wiegand 621 N.W.2d 476 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
- State v. Wiegand 621 N.W.2d 476 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
- State v. Risk 598 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1999
- State v. Risk 598 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1999