Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 10/15/2002
State v. Smith
Citations
- 652 N.W.2d 546
- 2002 Minn. App. LEXIS 1195
- 2002 WL 31300838
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- exclusionary rule should only be used when its deterrent value outweighs social costs of excluding probative, but illegally obtained evidence
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Willis, Minge, Parker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1963-01-14· cited 12,871×
- Michigan v. DeFillippoSupreme Court· 1979-06-25· cited 1,685×
- New York v. QuarlesSupreme Court· 1984-06-12· cited 1,468×
- State v. HarrisSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1999-03-11· cited 207×
- State v. Joon Kyu KimSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1987-01-02· cited 179×
- State v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1998-08-27· cited 76×
- State v. ConawaySupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-05-14· cited 46×
- State v. FiebkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1996-10-22· cited 13×
- State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1999-06-08· cited 4×
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.