Legal Opinion
State v. Dickerson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 24, 1991No. C9-90-1780PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
AMUNDSON, Judge.
Appellant Timothy Dickerson was charged with possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree. He challenged the admission of the crack cocaine seized by a police officer. After an eviden-tiary hearing, the trial court held the stop and search of appellant was justified. The trial court also held seizure of the crack was valid based on the plain feel exception to the warrant requirement. We reverse.
FACTS
On November 9, 1989, at approximately 8:15 p.m., Minneapolis police officers Vernon D. Rose and Bruce S. Johnson were patrolling the 1000 block of Morgan Avenue…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Brown v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Minnesota v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- State v. DickersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- State v. JonesCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- State v. CrookCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Minnesota v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.