State v. Schinzing

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that officer had reasonable suspicion because driver committed multiple “violations of the traffic laws,” including “crossing over into the opposite lane of traffic”
• refusing to decide whether exclusionary rule should apply to a violation of Minnesota law by a Minnesota officer acting within the State of Minnesota but outside his jurisdiction
• refusing to decide whether exclusionary rule should apply to a violation of Minnesota law by a Minnesota officer acting within the State of Minnesota but outside his jurisdiction
• odor of alcohol from car gave probable cause to search for violations of “open container” law
• “[The police officer’s] detection of the odor of alcohol coming from the car gave him probable cause to believe that a search of the passenger compartment would reveal open bottles or cans of alcohol”
• discussing rationale, but finding it unnecessary to the case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).