When is it OK for a cop to deploy a drug-sniffing dog? Is a gun locked in a car’s glove compartment within a driver’s reach? What does it mean for a criminal to have “previously committed” a crime?
The Minnesota Supreme Court last week issued three opinions that focused on criminal justice and, in every case, sided with police and prosecutors over Minnesotans fighting criminal convictions, alleging they had been deprived of their rights.
Coming less than a month after the state’s high court ruled a person cannot brandish a deadly weapon when under attack if they can reasonably retreat, the opinions continued to show how the justices view matters of crime and punishment in Minnesota.
Justice Theodora Gaïtas took no part in any of the decisions as she was not yet appointed to the court.
The drug-sniffing dog
On a summer night in 2021, Minnesota state trooper Jacob Bredsten pulled into a truck stop near the community of Hasty about 50 miles northwest of Minneapolis. There was a gas station and restaurant attached, and police knew it was an area for drug trafficking.
Bredsten saw a car with two adults sitting in the front seats. It was parked away from the gas pumps, which was enough to stir his suspicions. The trooper learned the car was registered to a home 130 miles away and the owner was significantly older than the pair in the car.
The driver was Jeron Garding of Moose Lake. Bredsten watched as he began extensively cleaning the car including “difficult-to-reach areas.” Bredsten said such cleaning was often done by people who had drugs in their car when they saw a police officer watching them.
The car’s passenger got out and went into the gas station. Bredsten approached the car as Garding put a large plastic bag in the trunk. When Bredsten asked if everything was OK, Garding said everything was fine and went into the gas station, too. A little while later, the passenger emerged.