Supreme Court of Minnesota· 6/2/1989

State v. Sorenson

Citations

441 N.W.2d 455
1989 Minn. LEXIS 139
1989 WL 56572

How courts have described this case

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

noting that \it is impossible to determine from the scant trial court record\ whether the area in question was curtilage
stating that an appellate court usually “will not decide issues which are not first addressed by the [district] court”
explaining that, in general, “we will not decide issues which are not first addressed by the [district] court”
recognizing appellate court’s discretion to consider new issues “when the interests of justice require their consideration and addressing them would not work an unfair surprise on a party”
declining to rule on the validity of a warrantless seizure because it was not raised at the district court, and there was “insufficient information in the trial court record” on the issue
in general, defendant who does not raise an issue in district court waives right to raise issue on appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Yetka, Kelley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

65 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.