Legal Opinion

Hawes v. 1997 Jeep Wrangler, Vin No. 1J4FY29POVP493248, License No. 874 PDG

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided November 23, 1999No. C3-99-782PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DANIEL F. FOLEY, Judge.*

The State of Minnesota challenges both the district court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment and its sua sponte grant of judgment in favor of respondent in this vehicle forfeiture proceeding under Minn.Stat. § 169.1217 (1998). The district court determined that forfeiture of the vehicle, used in committing respondent’s third offense within five years, violated equal protection, the Double Jeopardy Clause, and the Excessive Fines Clause of both the Minnesota and United States Constitutions. We reverse and remand for entry of judgment in favor of the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. United States v. BajakajianSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. United States v. UrserySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. United States v. One Assortment of 89 FirearmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. City of Albuquerque Ex Rel. Albuquerque Police Department v. One (1) 1984 White Chevy Ut., VIN 1G8CS18BXE8176575, New Mexico License No. 335-KRHNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2002
  2. City of New Brighton v. 2000 Ford Excursion VIN 1FMNU43S2YEA74156Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  3. Murphy v. COMMISSIONER OF HUMAN SERVICESCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  4. Mastakoski v. 2003 Dodge Durango, VIN 1D8HS78Z13F530764Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
  5. Morgan v. 2000 Volkswagen, License No. 279, Vin 3VWRA29M2YM125643Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API