Plain view

Warrantless searches

Defendant challenged the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress, arguing that the plain view exception did not justify the officer’s search of his vehicle and that he was subjected to an unlawful search incident to arrest.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the initial stop of defendant, based on the mistaken belief that he was the person named in a warrant, was reasonable.  Furthermore, the officer’s vehicle was justified under the plain view exception to the warrant requirement.  Affirmed.

State v. Stuckey, A18-0470, Hennepin County.

Criminal Defense Attorney Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


DISCLAIMER: Throughout this website, there are statements on various laws. Please note that this is not legal advice, and no reliance should be taken thereon, and an attorney client relationship is not established hereby. Further, please note that these legal statements may not currently be up to date, because the laws can change daily, and this website does not. Thus, you will always need to actually retain a lawyer to establish an attorney client relationship, to rely upon any advice, and to obtain up-to-date legal research. Thank you.