Legal Opinion

State v. Ingram

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided November 4, 1997No. C4-96-2493PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINIÓN

RANDALL, Judge.

Appellant challenges his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, arguing that the pistol seized must be suppressed because it was the fruit of an illegal search and seizure. We affirm.

FACTS

On February 9, 1996, at approximately 5:15 p.m., Minneapolis Police Officers Matthew Segulia and David Gray were on patrol when they were flagged down by a citizen at the intersection of Nicollet and Seventh Street. The citizen told the officers that a man in a dark “Hoyas” jacket and a white kerchief on his head was in the bus shelter around the corner, trying to sell…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  5. Minnesota v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. BergersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
  2. State v. OlsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  3. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
  4. State v. MorinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
  5. Jackson v. City of Brooklyn CenterDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2023

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