At the end of each year, the focus is always on the “top” – the top news stories, the top photographs, the top celebrity break-ups, the top restaurants, and even the top hashtags. As you review 2015, in no particular order, here is our “Top Criminal Law Changes in Minnesota.”
MN legalizes Gun Suppressors and Prohibits Ammunition by Ineligible Persons
On August 1, 2015, Senate File Number 878 took effect in the Minnesota State Legislature. This bill had numerous parts but one part legalized firearm suppressors or silencers. The definitions of suppressors or silencers are defined under Minn. Stat. § 609.66, Subd. 1a(c) as “any device for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearm…”
Another part of this bill addressed ineligible persons to possess firearms. Federal law states those convicted of felonies, crimes of violence or domestic assault could not possess firearms and ammunition. Minnesota law only prohibited those individuals from firearms. Now the state is in line with federal laws prohibiting those individuals from possessing and firearms and ammunition.
Minnesota Lowers DWI Threshold as an Aggravating Factor from .20 to .16
In DWI cases there are aggravating factors that will increase the severity of the charge. Aggravating factors prior to August 1, 2015, include having a prior DWI conviction or driver’s license revocation within 10 years, having a child in the vehicle at the time of the offense, or having an alcohol concentration of .20 or more. As of August 1, 2015, the aggravating factor of a .20 alcohol concentration was lowered to .16 or more. This means that on first-time DWIs, if a reading of the breath, blood or urine is .16 or over that individual would be facing a Gross Misdemeanor. In Minnesota, Gross Misdemeanors are punishable by up to a year in jail and/or a $3,000 fine.
Cops Need a Warrant for DUI Blood Test & Urine
The Minnesota Court of Appeals decided this past October that if law enforcement want to test the blood of a suspected drunk driver they must have a warrant. In State v. Trahan, the police pulled over Todd Trahan for driving erratically. Trahan initially said yes to the urine test, but the officers thought he had tampered with it and asked for a blood draw. When Trahan refused, the officers charged him with test refusal under the Minnesota Implied Consent law (Minn. Stat.§ 169A.51), which states that “refusal to take a test is a crime.” The appellate court determined Trahan’s Fourth Amendment constitutional rights were violated because the officers did not first obtain a warrant and no emergency existed to justify drawing blood without a warrant. Since this decision, officers must first obtain a warrant before charging someone with refusal of a blood test in DWI cases. Just this week, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in a similar case that criminalizing refusal to submit to warrantless urine tests is unconstitutional.
Adulteration by Bodily Fluid is Now a Gross Misdemeanor
In Minnesota, it is now a Gross Misdemeanor to a knowingly add blood, semen, vaginal fluid, or urine to any substance intended for human consumption. This law sparked from an incident where an individual was accused of ejaculating into a co-workers coffee several times. He was initially charged with criminal sexual conduct, but a judge ruled that Minnesota’s criminal sexual conduct laws did not criminalize such behavior because no “contact” was made between the parties. The Defendant was not convicted. In response to this, the legislature passed a law to criminalize such behavior. Now, in Minnesota, someone who does such a thing can be facing charges that carry up to a year in jail, and or a $3,000 fine.
Revenge Porn Considered Free Speech, For Now…
In the simplest of terms, revenge porn is posting another’s private nude or sexual photos online without that individual’s consent. Minnesota saw a case this year that addressed this issue. In State v. Turner, the appellant, Mr. Turner, posted ads on Cragislist in retaliation for a previous argument he had with a former girlfriend. The postings were sexually explicit and included phone numbers, so the ex-girlfriend received phone calls from men wanting to have sex with her. Turner was convicted of criminal defamation under Minn. Stat. § 609.765 which states, “defamatory matter is anything which exposes a person or a group, class or association to hatred, contempt, ridicule, degradation or disgrace in society, or injury to business or occupation”. Turner appealed stating that the statute violates his First Amendment rights of free speech because it is overbroad. The Minnesota State Supreme Court agreed with the appeal and confirmed it. Many other states are currently working on laws that make revenge porn illegal. This case has currently set a precedence that revenge porn is considered free speech in Minnesota, for now. The subject of revenge porn is likely to be a topic of legal conversation in 2016, especially in the legislature.
Welcome 2016
John F. Kennedy once said, “Change is the law of life.” At Brandt Kettwick Defense, we would like to wish everyone a Happy New Year and we hope that 2016 is a year full of favorable changes.