Legal Opinion
State v. Brooks
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 23, 2013No. Nos. A11-1042, A11-1043PublishedCited by 117 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GILDEA, Chief Justice.
The question presented in this case is whether the police violated the Fourth Amendment rights of appellant Wesley Eugene Brooks when they took blood and urine samples from him without a search warrant. Because we conclude that Brooks consented to the searches at issue, and thus that a warrant was unnecessary, we affirm.
This case arises out of three separate driving incidents that took place during a 6-month period from July 31, 2009, to January 25, 2010. The first incident happened in Scott County on July 31, 2009. At 2:06 a.m., a Shakopee police officer stopped…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- McDonald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Missouri v. McNeelySupreme Court of the United States · 2013
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by117 opinions
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2015
- State v. RyceSupreme Court of Kansas · 2016
- People v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- State of Iowa v. Dale Dean Pettijohn Jr.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2017
- State of Arizona v. Francisco L Encinas ValenzuelaArizona Supreme Court · 2016
112 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.