In State of Minnesota v. K.T.S., Mark D. Kelly successfully challenged evidence obtained during a routine traffic stop in Hennepin County, resulting in the dismissal of the felony charges against his client.
The police officer conducted a warrantless search of the client’s cargo-pants pockets during what was characterized as a protective pat-down. The defense argued that the officer exceeded the limited scope permitted under Terry v. Ohio and violated the client’s rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution.
The Hennepin County District Court agreed. It found that the objects inside the client’s pockets were not immediately identifiable as weapons or evidence of illegal activity and that the officer therefore lacked legal justification to remove them.
The unlawfully obtained evidence was suppressed, leaving the prosecution without the evidence needed to proceed. The felony charges were dismissed.
This result demonstrates why the details surrounding a traffic stop and police search matter. When law enforcement exceeds its constitutional authority, an experienced criminal defense attorney can challenge the resulting evidence and fight to prevent it from being used in court.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in future cases.
