State v. King

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• physical evidence must be suppressed as the product of statements unconstitutionally obtained, citing Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 484 (1963)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2015-08-19· cited 42×
• State v. Pietraszewski
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1969-11-21· cited 22×
• State v. Miller
  North Dakota Supreme Court· 1986-07-16· cited 13×
• State v. King
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1970-03-26· cited 7×
• State v. Dailson
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1970-04-03· cited 1×

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Wong Sun v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1963-01-14· cited 12,871×
• Mapp v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1961-10-09· cited 9,088×
• Jackson v. Denno
  Supreme Court· 1964-06-22· cited 6,121×
• Beck v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1964-11-23· cited 5,133×
• Townsend v. Sain
  Supreme Court· 1963-03-18· cited 4,485×
• Fay v. Noia
  Supreme Court· 1963-03-18· cited 3,950×
• Haynes v. Washington
  Supreme Court· 1963-05-27· cited 1,403×
• Lynumn v. Illinois
  Supreme Court· 1963-03-25· cited 792×
• Sims v. Georgia
  Supreme Court· 1967-01-23· cited 561×
• State Ex Rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1965-12-10· cited 119×
• State v. Bristol
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1967-03-03· cited 9×
• State v. Smith
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1911-12-15· cited 8×