Duluth Attorney | Civil Disorder Defense

Fighting a Civil Disorder Accusation in St. Louis County with a Dedicated Defense Attorney

The moment you’re accused of a crime, especially something as gravely serious and potentially mischaracterized as civil disorder, your entire world can come crashing down. It’s an immediate, jarring confrontation with the full, overwhelming power of the state, leaving you feeling isolated, misunderstood, and profoundly targeted. In Duluth, where community bonds are often tight and reputations are meticulously built over a lifetime, an accusation involving public disturbance and violence can feel like an intensely personal and public condemnation, threatening not only your freedom but also your standing in the community, your livelihood, and the very well-being of your family. The immediate fears are paralyzing: Will I lose my job? How will this impact my ability to live and work in Proctor or Two Harbors? The thought of navigating the complex and often unforgiving legal system alone, facing prosecutors and judges who may already hold preconceived notions based on the nature of the charge, can be utterly terrifying. This isn’t just about a legal charge; it’s about your core identity, your fundamental rights, and your entire future being put on trial.

This isn’t a minor legal skirmish or a simple misunderstanding; it’s a profound crisis demanding immediate, strategic, and utterly relentless action. The police, the county attorneys, the courts – they collectively represent an immense, often faceless, force with one singular and unyielding objective: to secure a conviction against you. They are not concerned with the subtle nuances of your intentions, the actual context of your actions, or the devastating ripple effect a conviction will have on your life in Bemidji or Cloquet. They see a statute, a case file, and a target for prosecution. But you must grasp this fundamental, liberating truth: an accusation is not a conviction. It is merely the opening salvo in a fierce and protracted legal battle. Your life is not over; it has simply entered its most challenging and critical chapter. And in this battle, you need a relentless fighter in your corner, a criminal defense attorney who not only deeply understands the brutal realities of the courtroom but will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you, unyieldingly challenging every assertion, dissecting every piece of evidence, and dismantling every assumption the state dares to throw your way. This is not a time for quiet despair or passive resignation; it is a resounding call to arms, demanding a strategic, forceful, and unwavering commitment to your defense, starting right now.

The Stakes: What a Conviction Truly Costs

Your Permanent Criminal Record

A conviction for civil disorder, even as a gross misdemeanor, leaves an indelible and severely damaging mark on your permanent criminal record. This isn’t a temporary footnote that will fade with time; it is a public and enduring fixture, readily accessible to potential employers, landlords, and anyone conducting a background check. Imagine the profound difficulty of applying for new employment, attempting to secure housing, or even trying to volunteer for local community initiatives in Duluth – that conviction will inevitably surface, immediately raising deeply negative questions and often leading to automatic disqualification. In the close-knit communities throughout St. Louis County, where personal reputation and trustworthiness are paramount, such a record, particularly one associated with public violence, can profoundly damage your standing, making it incredibly difficult to regain trust and respect, regardless of how much time passes or how diligently you strive to move forward with your life.

Loss of Second Amendment Rights

A conviction for civil disorder under Minnesota Statute 609.669 carries direct and severe implications for your Second Amendment rights. While the statute primarily concerns training or assembling for violent public disturbances, any conviction for a gross misdemeanor involving firearms, or the intent to use firearms unlawfully, can lead to the loss of your ability to legally purchase, possess, or carry firearms, both under state and potentially federal law. For many individuals in Northern Minnesota, where hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense are deeply ingrained and cherished aspects of their lives, the permanent loss or restriction of these rights can be a profound and deeply felt personal blow, impacting recreational activities, long-standing traditions, and a fundamental sense of personal security in places like Bemidji and Two Harbors.

Barriers to Employment and Housing

In today’s cautious and highly competitive environment, employers and landlords routinely conduct thorough and intrusive background checks. A criminal conviction for civil disorder, which explicitly involves “acts of violence by assemblages of three or more persons” and “damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual,” can create insurmountable barriers to both employment and housing. Many companies, especially those with public-facing roles, those involving any level of trust, or those with strict liability policies, will automatically disqualify applicants with such a record. Similarly, finding suitable housing in communities like Proctor or Cloquet can become an immense, frustrating challenge. Landlords often conduct background checks, and a conviction of this nature, implying a propensity for violence and public disruption, can lead to immediate and non-negotiable rejection, thereby creating deep instability and making it exceptionally difficult to secure stable work and a place to live, thus severely hindering your ability to rebuild your life after such an accusation.

Impact on Professional Licenses and Reputation

If your livelihood is dependent upon holding a professional license – whether you are a teacher, a healthcare provider, a tradesperson, or hold any other state-issued certification – a conviction for civil disorder can irreversibly jeopardize your ability to maintain or renew that license. Licensing boards, charged with protecting public safety, routinely review criminal convictions with intense scrutiny, particularly those involving public violence, disruption, or the unlawful use of weapons. Such a charge can be viewed with extreme seriousness, potentially leading to the immediate suspension or permanent revocation of your license. Beyond the professional realm, the damage to your personal reputation within the community can be severe, pervasive, and long-lasting. In areas where community standing, trust, and perceived adherence to social order are paramount, an accusation, and certainly a conviction, can indelibly tarnish your public image, adversely affecting your social interactions, community involvement, and overall sense of belonging. The repercussions extend far beyond the courtroom, touching and often destroying every facet of your life in St. Louis County.

The Accusation: Understanding the State’s Case

What Does the State Allege? Civil Disorder Explained in Plain English

When the state accuses you of civil disorder under Minnesota Statute 609.669, they are essentially claiming that you were involved in preparing for or participating in a violent public disturbance. This law focuses on activities that precede or contribute to chaos and harm in a community. It’s not simply about protesting or having a strong opinion; it’s about actions related to violence. The law covers two main scenarios: first, teaching or demonstrating how to use or make firearms, explosives, or incendiary devices with the knowledge that these will be used unlawfully in a civil disorder; and second, assembling with others to train or practice with these dangerous items, intending for them to be used unlawfully in such a disorder.

The prosecution’s case will focus on proving your knowledge and intent regarding unlawful violence. They will try to show that you understood these weapons or training would be used to cause injury or damage during a public disturbance involving violence by three or more people. This means they will look for evidence of specific instruction, practical training, or assembly with others, all connected to the intent to create or further a violent civil disorder. They might use communications, witness statements, or even the nature of the training materials themselves to build their case, aiming to demonstrate that your actions were a direct precursor to or part of a violent public disturbance in a place like Duluth or any other St. Louis County community.

The Law on the Books: Minnesota Statute 609.669

Minnesota Statute 609.669 criminalizes specific acts related to preparing for or engaging in civil disorder, particularly those involving the use of firearms or destructive devices, with the intent to cause violence, damage, or injury during public disturbances.

Subdivision 1.Prohibited acts.

(a) A person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor who:

(1) teaches or demonstrates to any other person how to use or make any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device capable of causing injury or death, knowing or having reason to know that it will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder; or

(2) assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of training with, practicing with, or being instructed in the use of any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device capable of causing injury or death, with the intent that it be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder.

(b) This section does not apply to law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of the officer’s official duties.

Subd. 2.Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them:

(1) “civil disorder” means any public disturbance involving acts of violence by assemblages of three or more persons, which causes an immediate danger of or results in damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual;

(2) “firearm” means any weapon which is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive; or the frame or receiver of any such weapon;

(3) “explosive or incendiary device” has the meaning given in section 609.668, subdivision 1; and

(4) “law enforcement officer” means any officer or employee of the United States, the state, or any political subdivision of the state, and specifically includes members of the National Guard and members of the armed forces of the United States.

History: 1995 c 244 s 23

The Prosecution’s Burden: Elements of Civil Disorder

For the prosecution to secure a conviction under Minnesota Statute 609.669, they must prove each and every one of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt. If they fail to establish even a single element, the entire case against you must fall apart. This is the crucial point where an aggressive and meticulous defense can dismantle the prosecution’s claims, forcing them to meet their incredibly high burden of proof and ensuring that no stone is left unturned in challenging their allegations.

Teaching or Demonstrating / Assembling for Training or Practice: The state must prove you either taught another person how to use or make a firearm, explosive, or incendiary device OR that you assembled with at least one other person for the purpose of training with or being instructed in the use of such a device. This requires concrete evidence of your active participation in one of these specific actions, such as direct observation, video evidence, or witness testimony.
Firearm, or Explosive or Incendiary Device Capable of Causing Injury or Death: The device in question must meet the statutory definitions of a “firearm” or “explosive or incendiary device” and crucially, it must be “capable of causing injury or death.” If the device was inoperable, a replica, or otherwise harmless, this element cannot be proven. My defense would scrutinize any forensic analysis to ensure the device’s capabilities are accurately assessed.
Knowing or Having Reason to Know (for Teaching/Demonstrating) / With the Intent (for Assembling): This is the critical “mental state” element. For teaching/demonstrating, the prosecution must prove you knew or should have known the device would be unlawfully used in civil disorder. For assembling for training, they must prove you had the intent that it be unlawfully employed in civil disorder. This requires demonstrating your understanding or explicit purpose, rather than just mere participation. The prosecution must delve into your thoughts and motivations, which is inherently difficult to prove.
Will Be Unlawfully Employed For Use In, or In Furtherance of, a Civil Disorder: The state must prove that the actions (teaching/demonstrating or training/assembling) were specifically linked to the unlawful use of the device in a “civil disorder.” A “civil disorder” is narrowly defined as a public disturbance involving violence by three or more persons, causing immediate danger or resulting in damage/injury. If the intended use was not violent, or not in the context of such a public disturbance, this element fails. This means they cannot merely point to firearm training; they must connect it directly to an unlawful, violent public disturbance in places like Duluth or Bemidji.

The Potential Outcome: Penalties for a Civil Disorder Conviction

A conviction for civil disorder under Minnesota Statute 609.669 is classified as a gross misdemeanor. This means that while it is not a felony, it carries serious potential penalties that can significantly impact your freedom, your financial stability, and your future. Understanding the gravity of these potential outcomes underscores the critical need for a tenacious and strategic defense, as the state will pursue these charges with serious intent to punish due to the underlying implications of violence and public unrest.

A person found guilty of violating Subdivision 1(a) of Minnesota Statute 609.669, by teaching/demonstrating or assembling for training related to civil disorder, may be sentenced to:

Imprisonment for not more than one year: This means you could face up to 365 days in jail. This is a substantial period of incarceration that would disrupt your life, separate you from your family, and impact your employment and ability to care for dependents.
Payment of a fine of not more than $3,000: In addition to, or in lieu of, jail time, the court can impose a significant financial penalty. This fine can add to the already considerable stress and burden associated with facing criminal charges.
Or both: The court has the discretion to impose both a jail sentence and a fine, depending on the specific circumstances of the case, the perceived severity of the actions, and your prior criminal history.

Beyond these immediate statutory penalties, a conviction for civil disorder in Duluth or anywhere in St. Louis County will result in a permanent criminal record. This record can then profoundly affect your employment opportunities (especially those requiring trust or public interaction), housing prospects, your right to possess firearms, and your standing in the community, particularly when the charge involves elements of violence and public disturbance.

The Battle Plan: Building Your Strategic Defense

An Accusation is Not a Conviction: The Fight Starts Now

Being accused of civil disorder in Duluth or St. Louis County can feel like an immediate and crushing judgment, a public condemnation that pre-empts any chance of a fair hearing. The state, with its vast resources and seemingly limitless power, presents an image of an unassailable force, ready to label you as a dangerous threat. But you must grasp this crucial truth: an accusation is merely the opening shot in a legal conflict, not the final verdict. This is not a moment for retreat, for quiet despair, or for accepting the state’s narrative; it is the precise instant to launch a tenacious, strategically precise counter-offensive. The prosecution has already crafted a story about your intentions and actions, a narrative designed to convince a judge or jury of your guilt. My unwavering mission is to meticulously dismantle that narrative, to expose every crack in its foundation, and to assert your truth with relentless, undeniable force. I will never passively accept their claims; I will challenge every single piece of their alleged evidence, scrutinize every procedural misstep they make, and rigorously question every witness until the state’s case crumbles under the sheer weight of its own deficiencies and inconsistencies.

The fight for your freedom, your reputation, and your future begins the very second you are charged. This is not a defensive crouch, waiting to react; it is an aggressive, proactive pursuit of justice. I will launch an exhaustive investigation into every conceivable angle: the true nature of any training, the actual intent behind any assembly, the context of any discussions, and the precise circumstances surrounding the accusation. Was the “disorder” truly violent? Did your actions genuinely contribute to violence? Were your fundamental rights violated at any point during the investigation or arrest in Cloquet or Bemidji? These are the critical questions I will relentlessly pursue. I will strategically leverage every legal tool available to us, from challenging the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence to arguing that the state cannot prove the necessary intent or connection to a violent civil disorder. This is an assertive battle, explicitly designed to expose the flaws in the state’s case and conclusively demonstrate that their accusations are not the unshakeable truth they purport them to be. Your fight starts now, and I will be there to lead the charge with unwavering determination.

How a Civil Disorder Charge Can Be Challenged in Court

Defending against a civil disorder charge under Minnesota Statute 609.669 requires a precise and aggressive approach, focusing on the highly specific elements the prosecution must prove. The key often lies in demonstrating that your actions lacked the necessary intent, or that the “civil disorder” element was not met, or that the state’s evidence was unlawfully obtained.

Lack of Intent or Knowledge The statute places a heavy burden on the prosecution to prove your mental state.
- No Intent for Unlawful Employment: For the “assembling for training” clause, the state must prove you had the intent that any firearms or devices be “unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder.” If your training was for lawful purposes (e.g., self-defense, sport, historical reenactment) and not aimed at violent public disturbance, this element fails. I would present evidence of the legitimate nature of any training.
- No Knowledge of Unlawful Use: For the “teaching or demonstrating” clause, the state must prove you knew or had reason to know the information would be “unlawfully employed” in civil disorder. If you taught general firearm safety or mechanics without any such knowledge or reasonable expectation of illicit use, this element cannot be proven. This is often applicable if the teaching occurred in a legitimate setting like a shooting range in Duluth.
- Absence of “Civil Disorder” Connection: The core of the charge requires a link to a “civil disorder” – a public disturbance involving violence by three or more persons causing danger/injury. If the training or assembly was for a peaceful protest, a political rally, or even merely a gathering that escalated without your violent intent or direct contribution, then the necessary connection to a violent civil disorder is missing.
Challenging the Definition of “Civil Disorder” The legal definition of “civil disorder” is specific and provides an avenue for defense.
- No Acts of Violence: The definition requires “acts of violence.” If the assembly or disturbance did not involve actual violence, or if any violence that occurred was isolated and not directly related to the purpose of the assembly or your actions, the “civil disorder” element might not be met. Peaceful protest, even if disruptive, is not civil disorder under this statute.
- Fewer Than Three Persons: A “civil disorder” requires “assemblages of three or more persons” engaging in violence. If the alleged disturbance involved fewer than three individuals, or if the “assemblage” cannot be proven to have acted violently, the statutory definition is not met, particularly relevant in smaller communities like Two Harbors.
- No Damage or Injury / Immediate Danger: The violence must cause “immediate danger of or results in damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual.” If the disturbance was loud or disruptive but did not involve actual or imminent physical harm or property damage, the state’s case may falter.
Challenging the “Firearm” or “Device” Capability The statute requires that the firearm or device be “capable of causing injury or death.”
- Inoperable or Replica: If the alleged firearm or device was inoperable, a non-functional replica, or demonstrably incapable of causing injury or death, it falls outside the scope of the statute. I would demand forensic testing to prove its actual capability, especially if it was found in a seemingly benign context in Proctor.
- Not a “Firearm” or “Explosive/Incendiary Device”: The definitions for “firearm” and “explosive or incendiary device” are specific. If the item in question does not strictly meet these definitions (e.g., a toy gun, fireworks, or a basic chemical mixture not designed as an explosive), then the charge cannot stand.
Illegal Search and Seizure / Miranda Violations Constitutional protections are paramount in any criminal case.
- Warrantless Search/Seizure: If evidence (e.g., training materials, firearms, communications) was obtained through an unlawful search of your property in Cloquet without a valid warrant or a recognized exception, that evidence can be suppressed. This often cripples the prosecution’s case.
- Miranda Violations: If you were questioned by law enforcement without being properly informed of your Miranda rights (the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney), or if your statements were coerced or involuntary, those statements can be excluded from evidence. If your statements are crucial to the state’s proof of intent or knowledge, their suppression can be devastating to their case.
- Improper Surveillance: If the state used illegal surveillance methods to gather evidence of your assembly or training, that evidence could be challenged and excluded from court.

Defense in Action: Scenarios in Northern Minnesota

Firearm Safety Class Misconstrued in Bemidji

An individual in Bemidji offers private firearm safety instruction, teaching basic gun handling and maintenance to small groups. A disgruntled former student, who holds extremist views, is later arrested for unrelated violent acts. During interrogation, the student claims they learned “tactics” from the instructor, implying the instructor knew of their unlawful intent. The instructor is then charged with civil disorder for teaching how to use a firearm, knowing it would be unlawfully employed.

In this scenario, the defense would strongly focus on No Knowledge of Unlawful Use. My defense would argue that the instructor’s classes were purely for legitimate firearm safety and education, without any awareness or reason to know that a student would later use that general knowledge for unlawful purposes. We would present evidence of the curriculum, the legitimate nature of the instruction, and the absence of any communication or intent from the instructor regarding civil disorder. The burden is on the state to prove the instructor’s knowledge of unlawful employment, not just that a student happened to later misuse general knowledge gained.

Peaceful Assembly Escalates in Cloquet

A group of citizens in Cloquet organizes a public assembly to protest a local government decision. The assembly starts peacefully, but as emotions run high, a few unaffiliated individuals among the crowd engage in acts of minor vandalism and push-and-shove with counter-protesters. My client, who was present and openly carrying a lawfully owned firearm (as permitted), is later charged with civil disorder, the state alleging their presence with a firearm contributed to the “violence” of the “assemblage.”

Here, the defense would primarily challenge the Absence of “Civil Disorder” Connection and No Acts of Violence directly attributable to my client. My defense would argue that the initial assembly was peaceful and for a lawful purpose. While some minor violence may have occurred by others, my client did not engage in any violent acts, nor did their lawful open carry directly cause or further the violent “civil disorder” as defined. The intent to participate in a violent public disturbance would be vehemently denied, emphasizing that a few isolated acts by others do not automatically implicate everyone present, especially if their actions remained peaceful and lawful in Cloquet.

“Survivalist” Training Misinterpreted in Two Harbors

A small group of friends who share a common interest in outdoor survival skills regularly assemble on private land near Two Harbors to practice bushcraft, first aid, and defensive shooting with their legally owned firearms. Law enforcement, receiving an anonymous tip about a “militia” training, monitors the group and observes them practicing tactical movements with firearms. They are subsequently charged with civil disorder for assembling for the purpose of training with firearms with the intent that it be unlawfully employed in a civil disorder.

This case presents a strong argument for No Intent for Unlawful Employment and challenging the Absence of “Civil Disorder” Connection. My defense would argue that the training was for lawful, recreational, and self-defense purposes, not for engaging in a violent public disturbance. We would present evidence of their legitimate interests in survivalism, their peaceful backgrounds, and the absence of any communications or plans related to unlawful employment in civil disorder. The prosecution’s attempt to label lawful training as preparatory for civil disorder would be vehemently challenged, emphasizing that practicing defensive skills on private land does not equate to intent to engage in public violence in Two Harbors.

Impromptu Gathering, No Incendiary Device in Proctor

After a local controversy, a frustrated crowd gathers spontaneously in downtown Proctor. My client is present and, in a moment of frustration, throws a bottle onto the street. The bottle does not contain any flammable liquid and causes no injury or significant damage. However, the police interpret this as an “incendiary device” and charge my client with civil disorder, alleging they taught or demonstrated how to use an incendiary device knowing it would be used unlawfully.

In this scenario, the defense would vehemently challenge Challenging the “Firearm” or “Device” Capability and the Absence of “Civil Disorder” Connection. My defense would argue that a simple bottle thrown without flammable contents is not an “explosive or incendiary device capable of causing injury or death” as defined by the statute. It caused no significant damage or injury and was not an incendiary device. Furthermore, the impromptu nature of the gathering and the client’s isolated act (without prior teaching or assembly for training with such a device) would demonstrate a lack of intent or knowledge for unlawful employment in a broad “civil disorder” as envisioned by the statute, particularly in a small town like Proctor.

The Advocate: Why a Dedicated Duluth Defense Attorney is Essential

Countering the Resources of the State

When you are facing charges under Minnesota Statute 609.669, related to civil disorder, you are confronting the immense, often intimidating, power and seemingly limitless resources of the state. The prosecution, backed by a vast apparatus of investigators, intelligence analysts, and seasoned attorneys, is singularly focused on securing a conviction against you. They possess the capability to conduct extensive investigations, compel witness testimony, and utilize sophisticated techniques, often including surveillance and digital forensics, to meticulously build their case. This often leaves the accused feeling isolated, overwhelmed, and completely outmatched. Without an equally determined and highly capable advocate standing resolutely by your side, this inherent imbalance of power can prove devastating. I intimately understand the insidious tactics they employ, the psychological pressure they relentlessly exert, and the inherent vulnerabilities within their legal framework. My unwavering role is to serve as your impenetrable shield and your incisive sword, meticulously matching their resources with my profound experience, strategic acumen, and an unyielding commitment to your defense. I will scrutinize every single piece of their purported evidence, relentlessly challenge every procedural misstep they make, and aggressively force them to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, thereby ensuring you are never simply crushed by the impersonal machinery of the state.

Strategic Command of the St. Louis County Courts

Navigating the intricate and often bewildering landscape of the criminal justice system in St. Louis County, encompassing the distinct courtrooms in Duluth, Cloquet, and Two Harbors, demands far more than a mere superficial understanding of legal statutes. Each courthouse, every presiding judge, and even individual prosecutors possess their own unique procedural quirks, unwritten rules, and preferred strategic approaches. It is fundamentally insufficient to simply comprehend the letter of the law; one must intimately grasp how those laws are practically applied, judiciously interpreted, and fiercely contested within the precise judicial arenas where your future hangs precariously in the balance. I possess a profound and granular understanding of the local court procedures, the established tendencies of the judges, and the prosecutorial strategies frequently deployed within this specific region. This invaluable, intimate knowledge empowers me to meticulously develop a defense strategy that is precisely tailored not just to the specific charges you face, but to the exact battlefield on which your legal struggle will be waged. I anticipate their every maneuver, I pinpoint their inherent vulnerabilities, and I meticulously craft a defense designed to exploit every conceivable opportunity, thereby ensuring your case is handled with the utmost precision, assertiveness, and strategic foresight it unequivocally demands. Your defense transcends mere abstract legal theory; it is about establishing comprehensive strategic command over the local judicial terrain.

Fighting for Your Story, Not Just the Police Report

The police report, frequently replete with formalistic jargon and presented as an unvarnished, objective truth, seldom, if ever, encapsulates the complete and complex narrative. It represents a limited, narrow snapshot, filtered exclusively through the often-biased lens of law enforcement, and is inherently designed to construct a case against you. However, you are profoundly more than a mere collection of allegations inscribed on a piece of paper. You possess a unique life, a specific set of circumstances, and a personal narrative that inherently merits being heard, understood, and respected in its entirety. When you are accused of civil disorder, the prosecution’s primary objective will be to reduce your identity to a simple criminal label, devoid of context or humanity. My unwavering purpose is to ensure that your comprehensive story, the intricate context, and the subtle nuances of your situation are brought vividly and compellingly to light. I will conduct a painstaking investigation into every conceivable detail, engage in thorough and empathetic discussions with witnesses who genuinely know and understand the real you, and uncover compelling counter-evidence that meticulously paints a complete and accurate picture. I will tirelessly work to humanize you in the eyes of the court, fighting with every fiber of my being to ensure that your character, your underlying intentions, and the full spectrum of your circumstances are comprehensively considered, rather than being overshadowed by the cold, often incomplete, facts presented in a police report originating from Proctor or Bemidji. Your story holds immense significance, and I will stand as its most formidable and unyielding advocate.

An Unwavering Commitment to a Winning Result

When your freedom, your reputation, and your entire future hang precariously in the balance, you require far more than mere legal representation; you demand an unshakeable, unwavering commitment to achieving the most favorable outcome possible. Facing charges under Minnesota Statute 609.669, related to civil disorder, represents a profound crisis in your life, and you inherently deserve an attorney who approaches it with the utmost urgency, dedication, and ferocity it unequivocally demands. My commitment to your cause is absolute and without compromise. I will meticulously leave no stone unturned in the comprehensive preparation of your defense, diligently exploring every available legal avenue, and relentlessly challenging every single aspect of the prosecution’s case. Whether it entails the painstaking review of voluminous evidence, the aggressive negotiation with prosecutors to secure a favorable plea agreement (if such a path truly serves your best interests), or the unwavering and relentless cross-examination of witnesses during a trial, my singular focus remains constant: to achieve a winning result specifically tailored for you. I deeply comprehend the profound and far-reaching impact this accusation has on every facet of your life in Duluth and beyond, and I pledge to fight with every fiber of my being to safeguard your fundamental rights, protect your invaluable reputation, and secure your future. Your ultimate victory is not merely a goal; it is my sacred and unyielding mission.

Your Questions Answered

What does “civil disorder” mean under Minnesota law?

“Civil disorder” is defined in Minnesota Statute 609.669, Subdivision 2(1), as any public disturbance involving acts of violence by assemblages of three or more persons, which causes an immediate danger of or results in damage or injury to the property or person of any other individual. It’s about violent public unrest, not peaceful protest.

Can I be charged for attending a protest that turns violent?

Not necessarily, if your presence was for a lawful purpose and you did not engage in or intend to further the violent acts. The law specifically targets teaching/demonstrating how to use weapons for civil disorder, or assembling for training with the intent that weapons be used unlawfully in civil disorder. Mere presence at a violent protest is usually not enough for this specific charge.

What are the penalties for a civil disorder conviction?

Civil disorder is a gross misdemeanor. A conviction carries a potential sentence of up to one year in jail and/or a fine of up to $3,000. These are serious penalties that can impact your freedom and financial well-being, and they will result in a permanent criminal record.

Will I lose my right to own firearms if convicted?

Yes. A conviction for civil disorder, classified as a gross misdemeanor that often involves the unlawful use of firearms, will typically result in the loss of your right to possess firearms under both Minnesota and federal law. This is a significant and often permanent consequence.

What if I was teaching a legitimate self-defense class?

If you were teaching a legitimate self-defense class without any knowledge or reason to know that the skills would be unlawfully employed in a civil disorder, you should not be guilty under this statute. The prosecution must prove your specific knowledge or intent regarding the unlawful use in a violent public disturbance.

Does “training with” a firearm include target practice?

Not necessarily. Training with a firearm, for this statute, must be done with the intent that the firearm will be unlawfully employed in a civil disorder. Lawful target practice, even in a group, is generally not illegal unless there is clear evidence of this specific violent intent related to public disturbance.

What kind of evidence does the state use in these cases?

The state may use various types of evidence, including witness testimony (from law enforcement, informants, or other participants), video recordings of assemblies or training, digital communications (emails, texts, social media), and physical evidence of firearms, explosives, or training materials.

Can I fight this charge if there were fewer than three people involved in the alleged disturbance?

Yes, absolutely. The definition of “civil disorder” explicitly requires “assemblages of three or more persons” engaging in acts of violence. If the alleged disturbance or training involved fewer than three individuals, the state cannot meet this element of the definition, which could lead to a dismissal.

What if the “explosive device” was harmless?

If the alleged “explosive or incendiary device” was not actually “capable of causing injury or death,” then a key element of the crime is missing. My defense would demand forensic testing to prove the device’s actual capability and argue that if it was harmless, it doesn’t meet the statutory definition.

Should I talk to the police if they question me about civil disorder?

No. You should never speak with law enforcement about a civil disorder accusation without your attorney present. Anything you say can be used against you, and you could inadvertently provide information that strengthens the prosecution’s case. Politely invoke your right to remain silent and request an attorney.

Can a conviction affect my professional license?

Yes. A conviction for civil disorder, especially given its implication of violence and public disruption, can lead to the suspension, revocation, or denial of professional licenses. Licensing boards take such matters very seriously and will review your criminal history.

What if the assembly was peaceful but police say it was violent?

If the assembly was genuinely peaceful and did not involve acts of violence as defined by the statute, your defense would focus on challenging the state’s characterization of the event. Witness testimony, video evidence, and accounts from other participants could be used to prove the peaceful nature of the gathering.

Does this law apply to National Guard members or armed forces?

No, the statute specifically states in Subdivision 1(b) that it “does not apply to law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of the officer’s official duties,” and Subdivision 2(4) explicitly includes “members of the National Guard and members of the armed forces of the United States” within the definition of “law enforcement officer.”

Can I get this charge expunged from my record later?

As a gross misdemeanor, a civil disorder conviction may be eligible for expungement in Minnesota after a certain period and if specific conditions are met. However, expungement is not guaranteed and requires a separate legal process, especially for charges involving violence.

What role does intent play in this charge?

Intent is absolutely central to this charge. For teaching/demonstrating, you must have known or had reason to know the device would be unlawfully employed for civil disorder. For assembling for training, you must have had the intent that it be unlawfully employed for civil disorder. Without proving this specific intent, the state’s case fails.