Legal Opinion
State v. Quinn
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 31, 1989No. C7-88-14PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KELLEY, Justice.
As the result of a court order authorizing a wiretap, police intercepted conversations and later seized certain evidence implicating respondents in various types of criminal activity. The respondents moved to suppress the evidence contending that the warrant authorizing the wiretap on its face was fatally defective for failure to include a statutory phrase that the warrant “must terminate upon attainment of the authorized objective.” Minn.Stat. § 626A.06, subd. 4(h). By a split decision, a court of appeals panel affirmed a trial court order suppressing the evidence for that…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Berger v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. GiordanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Osborn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. HannukselaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- State v. CalashSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- State v. HesterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- Hester v. Redwood CountyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- State v. LindseyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.