State of Minnesota, Appellant, vs. Cree Rae Larson, Respondent.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
OFFICE APPELLATE COURTS STATE OF MINNESOTA AUG 1 9 2015 IN SUPREME COURT FILED A14-0128 State of Minnesota, Appellant, vs. Cree Rae Larson, Respondent. ORDER Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that in light of our opinion in State v. Lindquist, No. Al2-0599, N.\V.2d (Minn. Aug. 19, 2015), holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply to violations of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or Article I, Section 10, of the Minnesota Constitution, when law enforcement acts in good faith, objectively reasonable reliance on binding appellate precedent, the decision of the court of appeals is reversed and this matter is remanded to the district court for trial. Dated: August 19, 20 15 t ,/)ch. ~UR!J G. Barry Anderson Associate Justice ~- GILDEA, C.J. dissents. PAGE, J., dissents. LILLEHAUG, J., dissents. 2 DISSENT GILDEA, Chief Justice (dissenting). For the reasons set forth in my dissent in State v. Lindquist, No. A12-0599 - N.W.2d - (Minn. Aug. 19, 2015), I respectfully dissent. D-1 DISSENT PAGE, Justice (dissenting). For the reasons set forth in my dissent in State v. Lindquist, No. Al2-0599, N.W. 2d _(Minn. Aug. 19, 2015), I respectfully dissent. D-1 DISSENT LILLEHAUG, Justice (dissenting). For the reasons set fmih in my dissent in State v. Lindquist, No. Al2-0599, _ N.W.2d _(Minn. Aug. 19, 2015), I respectfully dissent. D-1
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
