Legal Opinion

State v. LaRose

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 25, 2004No. C5-03-93, C9-03-95PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RANDALL, Judge.

On consolidated appeals from separate convictions for felony fifth-degree controlled substance crime (possession of marijuana), appellant argues that the law against possessing marijuana is merely a civil/regulatory law and, thus, the State of Minnesota cannot enforce that law on the Leech Lake Indian Reservation. Appellant also argues that the search warrant in one of the two cases was improperly issued to a reservation peace officer. Appellant further claims that the cooperative agreement between the state and reservation officers was invalid, and that, in any event,…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Cherokee Nation v. State of GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1831
  3. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission IndiansSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Bryan v. Itasca CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Rostker v. GoldbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
  2. State v. HartmannCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  3. United States v. PersonDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2006
  4. State of Minnesota v. Todd Jeremy ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API