State v. Mollberg (1976)
green
· 104 citation events
across 10 courts.
Showing the 27 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197720012026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
State of Minnesota v. Thomas James Mitchell (2015)
State v. Thisius, 281 N.W.2d 645, 645-46 (Minn. 1978). “[A] search is limited in scope to those areas where one would reasonably expect to find the items identified in the search warrant.” State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 383 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 468 (1976).
green
Berglund v. City of Maplewood, MN (2001)
Similarly, in State v. Mollberg, the police searched defendant’s house for marijuana while they were in the house executing a search warrant for freshly killed deer, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 466 (1976). 246 N.W.2d at 466 .
green
State of Minnesota v. David Paul Patterson (2016)
State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 385 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 469 (1976), see also Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 , 93 S. Ct. 2523 (1973).
green
State v. Raines (2006)
The court noted that this is the approach it has “taken in deciding whether to suppress evidence seized in searches that, though constitutional, involve statutory violations.” Id. at 863-64 (citing State v. Smith, 367 N.W.2d 497, 504-05 (Minn.1985) (refusing to suppress because the violation was a technical violation of a statute where there was little doubt a court order would have been issued on request); State v. Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d 105, 108-09 (Minn.1983) *277 (citing …
agreeing with the approach adopted by federal courts for violations of Fed.R.Crim.P. 41
green
State v. Lindsey (1991)
See, e.g., State v. Smith, 367 N.W.2d 497, 504-05 (Minn.1985) (refusing to suppress because violation was technical violation of statute and “[tjhere can be little doubt that a court order would have been issued on request”); State v. Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d 105, 108-09 (Minn.1983) (citing some of the other cases of this court to the same effect); State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 386-87 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 470 (1976) (stating that “[w]e fully agree with the approach adopted by …
stating that “[w]e fully agree with the approach adopted by the Federal courts” for violations of R. 41
green
State v. Niemczyk (1987)
State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976) (quoting Hess v. United States, 496 F.2d 936, 938 (8th Cir.1974)).
quoting Hess v. United States, 496 F.2d 936, 938 (8th Cir.1974)
green
State of Minnesota v. Lorenzo Leontay Washington (2016)
State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 388 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976).
green
State of Minnesota v. Yatarrie Lee Brown (2016)
“It is well established that the fact that a defendant exercises his constitutional right to trial by jury to determine his guilt or innocence must have no bearing on the sentence imposed.” State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 388 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976) (quotation omitted). “[T]he record must affirmatively show that the [district] court sentenced the defendant solely upon the facts of his case and his personal history, and not as punishment for his refusal to plead guilty…
quotation omitted
green
State of Minnesota v. Jonathan Andrew Bursch (2015)
See, e.g., State v. Simon, 275 N.W.2d 51, 52 (Minn. 1979) (defendant constructively possessed narcotics found, along with a passport, in his bedroom in a mobile home defendant jointly leased with a friend); State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 390 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 472 (1976) (defendant constructively possessed marijuana found in bedroom along with letters addressed to defendant and the front end of defendant’s motorcycle); State v. Denison, 607 N.W.2d 796, 800 (Minn. App. 2000…
green
Steven David Pawliszko v. State of Minnesota (2014)
State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 388 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976).
green
State of Minnesota v. Thomas David Newman (2014)
“The standard of review of sentencing departures is whether the [district] court committed an abuse of discretion.” State v. Anderson, 463 N.W.2d 551, 553 (Minn. App. 1990), review denied (Minn. Jan. 14, 1991). 9 “It is well established that the fact that a defendant exercises his constitutional right to trial by jury to determine his guilt or innocence must have no bearing on the sentence imposed.” State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 388 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976) (quotatio…
quotation omitted
green
State v. Dickey (2013)
State v. Wiley, 366 N.W.2d 265, 270 (Minn.1985); State v. Colsch, 284 N.W.2d 839, 841 (Minn.1979); State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 390 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 472 (1976); State v. LaBarre, 292 Minn. 228, 232-33, 237 , 195 N.W.2d 435, 439, 441 (1972); State v. Denison, 607 N.W.2d 796, 800 (Minn.App.2000), review denied (Minn. June 13, 2000).
green
State v. Johnson (1996)
See, e.g., State v. Cusick, 387 N.W.2d 179, 181 (Minn.1986) (holding evidence was sufficient to establish constructive possession in driver of car where cocaine kit was found next to driver’s wallet in front seat of car, even though girlfriend owned car, was cocaine user, and testified cocaine was hers); State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 390 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 472 (1976) (holding that evidence supported constructive possession of marijuana discovered in bedroom closet of home…
holding that evidence supported constructive possession of marijuana discovered in bedroom closet of home in which defendant frequently stayed and was expected to return and where police found various items of his personal property in that bedroom
green
State v. Fay (1992)
The state argues that such minor statutory violations do not merit suppression absent a showing of prejudice by defendant, relying on State v. Mollberg, 246 N.W.2d 463, 470 (Minn.1976).
green
State v. Gray (1990)
In certain situations a single factor alone can create exigent circumstances, including: hot pursuit of a fleeing felon, United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38, 42-43 , 96 S.Ct. 2406, 2409-2410 , 49 L.Ed.2d 300 (1976); Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 298-99 , 87 S.Ct. 1642, 1645-46 , 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967); imminent destruction or removal of evidence, Cupp v. Murphy, 412 U.S. 291, 296 , 93 S.Ct. 2000 , 36 L.Ed.2d 900 (1973); Schmerber v. California, 384 …
green
State v. Alayon (1990)
State v. Mollberg, 246 N.W.2d 463, 468 (Minn.1976).
green
State v. Yagow (1988)
See Nichols, 247 N.W.2d at 255 ; State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 471 (1976).
green
State v. Hatton (1986)
Exigent circumstances may exist where there is a risk of removal or destruction of evidence, State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 384 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 469 (1976), and where the public or the arresting police officers are in danger.
green
State v. Thisius (1978)
Recent Minnesota cases supporting this general rule include State v. Swain, Minn., 269 N.W.2d 707 (1978), and State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 383 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 468 (1976).
green
State v. Dale (1985)
See also, State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976); Drinkwater v. State, 73 Wis.2d 674 , 245 N.W.2d 664 (1976).
green
State v. Braun (1984)
See also, State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976); Drinkwater v. State, 73 Wis.2d 674 , 245 N.W.2d 664 (1976).
green
State v. Bawdon (1986)
See also, State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976); Drinkwater v. State, 73 Wis.2d 674 , 245 N.W.2d 664 (1976).
green
State v. Denison (2000)
See State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376, 390 , 246 N.W.2d 463, 472 (1976) (it was proved that defendant possessed marijuana because it was located in a closet where he kept personal items).
it was proved that defendant possessed marijuana because it was located in a closet where he kept personal items
green
State v. Siegfried (1978)
See, also, State v. Mollberg, 310 Minn. 376 , 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976); State v. Phelps, 297 Minn. 61 , 209 N.W.2d 780 (1973); State v. Lindquist, 295 Minn. 398 , 205 N.W.2d 333 (1973); State v. Cox, 294 Minn. 252 , 200 N.W.2d 305 (1972).
green
State v. Willis (1978)
See, State v. Mollberg, 246 N.W.2d 463 (Minn. 1976).
green
State v. Bradley (1978)
See, in support of this reasoning, our most recent decision in State v. Mollberg, Minn., 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976), where we upheld a warrantless search of a dwelling for drugs in a situation where there was a threatened danger of disposal of the drugs, by a third person on the premises who could not be arrested, if the police had gone to obtain a warrant authorizing a search for the drugs.
green
State v. Ruud (1977)
See, State v. Mollberg, Minn., 246 N.W.2d 463 (1976).