6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 39 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Haase v. Commissioner of Public Safety.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Haase v. Commissioner of Public Safety Anchor | green | “when the facts are not in dispute, the validity of a search is a question of law subject to de novo review.” | 18 |
| 2 | Bodana v. Cagle | green | “for a search to fall under the consent exception, the state must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant freely and voluntarily consented.” | 7 |
| 3 | City of Lake Elmo v. Metropolitan Council | green | “the preponderance of the evidence standard requires that to establish a fact, it must be more probable that the fact exists than that the contrary exists.” | 5 |
| 4 | Haase v. Commissioner of Public Safety | green | “we independently analyze the undisputed facts to determine whether evidence resulting from the search should be suppressed.” | 4 |
| 5 | Bodana v. Cagle | green | “whether consent is voluntary is determined by examining the totality of the circumstances.” | 3 |
| 6 | Haase v. Commissioner of Public Safety | green | “when reviewing the constitutionality of a search, we independently analyze the undisputed facts to determine whether evidence resulting from the search should be suppressed.” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.