Officers for the state decided to enter defendant's home without a warrant, and eventually began to question them. Those answers became evidence (as such things often do). The State tried using those statements, claiming that they would have gotten the statements anyway... Luckily Judge Cleary, Reilly, and Ross ruled that was inappropriate.
A14-0432 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Kyle Dean McClain, Appellant.
St. Louis County District Court, Hon. Mark A. Munger.
The inevitable-discovery exception to the exclusionary rule is limited to physical evidence and does not apply to statements obtained after an unlawful search.
Reversed and remanded. Chief Judge Edward J. Cleary.
Concurring specially, Judge Kevin G. Ross.
Wed, January 3, 2018 @ 1:02 AM
Wed, September 19, 2018 @ 6:18 PM
Thu, September 27, 2018 @ 1:18 AM
Fri, October 12, 2018 @ 12:24 AM
Your Email/URL (Optional):
Comment Guidelines: No HTML is allowed. Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted. Thanks.
©2019 Ascheman Law | 612-217-0077. Website Design by Lift Creative.