Skip to main content
· 6/17/2024

State of Minnesota v. Wilford John Boyd

Syllabus

In this direct appeal from appellant's conviction for second-degree sale of a controlled substance, appellant argues that his conviction must be reversed because the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence that was discovered in his vehicle following an unconstitutional dog sniff. Because the objective facts do not establish reasonable, articulable suspicion that controlled substances were in the vehicle, we reverse.

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.