In the first example, an Anoka County case, the defendant's motion is granted, and test evidence is suppressed. In that case, the positions and reasoning of the defendant seem almost wholesale adopted by the court. In the second, a Hennepin County case, the motion is denied. In that case, and the defendant's arguments in favor of suppression are set up and knocked down one by one.
No doubt these and many other cases will be appealed by the respective parties. There are many, many more such rulings to follow. Thankfully, there should be some clarity coming from the Supreme Court of Minnesota. The Court agreed to expedite Brooks v. Minnesota, No. 12-478 (Order filed April 22, 2013). Brooks and two other Minnesota cases (two of which were urine tests) were remanded back to the State of Minnesota by the SCOTUS in light of the ruling in McNeely. Oral arguments are set to commence on September 11, 2013. A decision should follow in a couple months.