Duluth Attorney | Nicotine Sale Defense

Fighting a Nicotine Delivery Product Sale Accusation in Duluth with a Dedicated Defense Attorney

The phone rings, and suddenly your world tilts on its axis. You’ve been accused of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 in Duluth, Minnesota. One moment, you’re running your business, living your life in a community like St. Louis County, perhaps enjoying the quiet solitude of Two Harbors, or the bustling daily rhythm of Proctor, or the close-knit feel of Cloquet. The next, you’re staring down the barrel of a criminal charge. This isn’t just a minor inconvenience; it’s a direct assault on your reputation, your livelihood, and your peace of mind. The immediate shock can be overwhelming. You might be replaying every interaction, every transaction, wondering how this happened, how you could be in this impossible situation. The fear of the unknown—what happens next, what this means for your future—can be paralyzing.

This isn’t just about a potential fine or a court date. This is about your standing in your community, the trust you’ve built, and the very fabric of your daily life. An accusation like this, even for a so-called “petty” misdemeanor, casts a long shadow. Will your customers look at you differently? Will the rumors spread through Bemidji or your hometown? How will this impact your ability to provide for your family, to maintain the life you’ve worked so hard to build? The state, with all its power and resources, is now focused on you. They are not looking to understand; they are looking to prosecute. But you need to understand one crucial truth right now: an accusation is not a conviction. It is the beginning of a fight, and you need a fighter in your corner.

The Stakes: What a Conviction Truly Costs

Your Permanent Criminal Record

A conviction for selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21, even if initially a petty misdemeanor, can result in a permanent mark on your criminal record, particularly for repeat offenses which escalate to a misdemeanor. This isn’t just some abstract concept; it’s a tangible blight that follows you. Every background check for a job, every rental application, every financial inquiry can reveal this conviction. In a community like Duluth or the surrounding towns, where personal reputation often carries significant weight, such a record can be devastating. It implies a lack of judgment, a disregard for the law, and can lead to a pervasive sense of mistrust from employers, landlords, and even neighbors. Even if the immediate penalties seem minor, the long-term impact of a criminal record can quietly undermine your future opportunities and limit your options in ways you might not anticipate.

Loss of Second Amendment Rights

While a petty misdemeanor conviction for a first offense of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 might not immediately revoke your Second Amendment rights, a subsequent misdemeanor conviction absolutely can. In Minnesota, a conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, for example, or certain other specific misdemeanors, can lead to a federal prohibition on possessing firearms. Even for seemingly minor offenses, the legal landscape surrounding gun rights is complex and often unforgiving. If you are someone who owns firearms for sport, hunting, or self-defense, a criminal conviction of any kind, particularly one that escalates, puts those rights at significant risk. This isn’t merely about the ability to own a gun; for many in Northern Minnesota, it’s about a way of life, a long-standing tradition, and a fundamental right they cherish. Protecting these rights means fighting every accusation with everything you have.

Barriers to Employment and Housing

The existence of a criminal conviction, even for what might seem like a minor offense like selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21, can create significant barriers to both employment and housing. Many employers conduct thorough background checks, and a criminal record can be an immediate red flag, leading to job offer rescissions or outright rejections. This is especially true for positions of trust, or those involving sales and customer interaction, which are prevalent in areas like St. Louis County. Similarly, landlords often use background checks as part of their tenant screening process. In tight-knit communities such as Proctor or Two Harbors, where housing options can be limited, a criminal record can make it exceedingly difficult to secure stable living arrangements. The impact can ripple through your financial stability, making it harder to secure loans, insurance, and other necessities that depend on a clean record and a perception of reliability.

Impact on Professional Licenses and Reputation

For individuals holding professional licenses, or those working in regulated industries, a conviction for selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 can have far-reaching and potentially career-ending consequences. Depending on your profession, licensing boards may review criminal convictions and can impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or even revocation of your license. This could apply to anyone from a business owner in Cloquet to a healthcare professional in Bemidji. Beyond the direct professional impact, the damage to your reputation can be immeasurable. In smaller communities, news travels quickly, and an accusation, let alone a conviction, can tarnish your standing among colleagues, clients, and community members. Your integrity is on the line, and defending against these charges is not just about avoiding a legal penalty; it’s about preserving your professional future and the good name you’ve painstakingly built.

The Accusation: Understanding the State’s Case

What Does the State Allege? Sale of Nicotine Delivery Products to Persons Under Age 21 Explained in Plain English

When the state alleges you’ve violated Minnesota Statute 609.6855, it means they believe you, as a person 21 years of age or older, sold, gave, or otherwise furnished a product containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia to someone under the age of 21. This doesn’t apply to traditional tobacco products or electronic delivery devices already covered by other laws. It specifically targets those newer nicotine or lobelia products intended for human consumption that aren’t classified as tobacco or e-cigarettes. The heart of the accusation lies in the transfer of these specific products to an underage individual. The prosecution will try to prove that you knowingly or negligently provided these items, regardless of whether you personally benefited from the exchange.

This charge often arises from sting operations conducted by local law enforcement in places like Duluth, or from complaints made by parents or community members in areas like St. Louis County. The focus is on the act of furnishing the product to someone who has not yet reached the legal age of 21. It’s important to understand that the state doesn’t need to prove malicious intent; simply the act of providing the product to an underage person can be enough to trigger the charge. This is why even an accidental oversight or a misjudgment of age can lead to serious legal trouble, requiring a robust defense to challenge the state’s assertions.

The Law on the Books: Minnesota Statute 609.6855

Minnesota Statute 609.6855 aims to prevent individuals under the age of 21 from accessing and consuming certain nicotine or lobelia-containing products. It establishes a penalty for those 21 years of age or older who furnish these products to minors, and also addresses the use of false identification by underage individuals attempting to purchase them.

609.6855 SALE OF NICOTINE DELIVERY PRODUCTS TO PERSONS UNDER AGE 21.

Subdivision 1.Penalty to sell or furnish. (a) Any person 21 years of age or older who sells, gives, or otherwise furnishes to a person under the age of 21 years a product containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia, whether natural or synthetic, intended for human consumption, or any part of such a product, that is not tobacco or an electronic delivery device as defined by section 609.685, is guilty of a petty misdemeanor for the first violation. Whoever violates this subdivision a subsequent time within five years of a previous conviction under this subdivision is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(b) It is an affirmative defense to a charge under this subdivision if the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant reasonably and in good faith relied on proof of age as described in section 340A.503, subdivision 6.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a product containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia intended for human consumption, whether natural or synthetic, or any part of such a product, that is not tobacco or an electronic delivery device as defined by section 609.685, may be sold to persons under the age of 21 if the product is a drug, device, or combination product, as those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, that is authorized for sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration.

Subd. 2.Use of false identification. A person under the age of 21 years who purchases or attempts to purchase a product containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia intended for human consumption, or any part of such a product, that is not tobacco or an electronic delivery device as defined by section 609.685, and who uses a driver’s license, permit, Minnesota identification card, or any type of false identification to misrepresent the person’s age, shall only be subject to an alternative civil penalty in accordance with subdivision 3. No penalty shall apply to a person under the age of 21 years who purchases or attempts to purchase these products while under the direct supervision of a responsible adult for training, education, research, or enforcement purposes.

Subd. 3.Alternative penalties. Law enforcement and court system representatives shall consult, as applicable, with interested persons, including but not limited to parents, guardians, educators, and persons under the age of 21 years, to develop alternative civil penalties for persons under the age of 21 years who violate this section. Consulting participants shall consider a variety of alternative civil penalties including but not limited to tobacco-free education programs, community service, court diversion programs, and tobacco cessation programs, and for persons under the age of 18 years, notice to schools and to parents or guardians. Alternative civil penalties developed under this subdivision shall not include fines or monetary penalties.

The Prosecution’s Burden: Elements of Sale of Nicotine Delivery Products to Persons Under Age 21

The state bears the heavy burden of proving every single element of the alleged crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a fundamental principle of our justice system. If the prosecution fails to convince a jury or a judge on even one of these elements, their entire case against you collapses, and you cannot be convicted. This isn’t a minor detail; it is the core of any criminal defense. My job is to scrutinize every piece of evidence, challenge every assertion, and expose any weakness in the state’s attempt to prove each element, ensuring they meet their incredibly high standard of proof.

Defendant is 21 Years of Age or Older: The prosecution must prove that the individual accused of selling or furnishing the product was at least 21 years old at the time of the alleged offense. This element is usually straightforward to establish through identification, but it’s still something the state must formally prove.
Sale, Giving, or Furnishing: The state must demonstrate that the defendant engaged in an act of selling, giving, or otherwise providing the product. This can include a direct hand-to-hand transaction, leaving the product for someone, or any other means by which the underage person gained possession through the defendant’s action.
Product Contains or Delivers Nicotine or Lobelia: The prosecution must prove that the specific product involved in the alleged transaction actually contained or delivered nicotine or lobelia. This often involves laboratory analysis of the product seized as evidence.
Intended for Human Consumption: It must be established that the product was designed and intended for use by humans, rather than for other purposes. This distinguishes these products from, for example, certain industrial chemicals or non-consumable items.
Not Tobacco or an Electronic Delivery Device: This is a crucial element. The state must show that the product in question falls outside the definition of traditional tobacco products (like cigarettes or cigars) or electronic delivery devices (like vapes defined under a different statute, 609.685). This means the focus is on newer, often alternative, nicotine or lobelia products.
Provided to a Person Under the Age of 21 Years: The most critical element is proving that the recipient of the product was definitively under the age of 21 at the time of the alleged transaction. This often involves examining identification, or if a sting operation, confirming the age of the undercover individual.

The Potential Outcome: Penalties for a Sale of Nicotine Delivery Products to Persons Under Age 21 Conviction

Facing a charge for selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 is a serious matter, and the penalties, while seemingly minor for a first offense, can escalate quickly and carry significant long-term consequences. This isn’t just a slap on the wrist; it’s a criminal conviction that can follow you, impacting your life far beyond the courtroom. Understanding these potential penalties is crucial for grasping the gravity of the situation and the necessity of a forceful defense.

First Violation: Petty Misdemeanor

For a first-time conviction under Minnesota Statute 609.6855, the offense is classified as a petty misdemeanor. While a petty misdemeanor doesn’t carry a jail sentence, it can still result in a fine of up to $300. More importantly, it creates a criminal record, which can have the far-reaching effects discussed earlier, impacting employment, housing, and reputation in communities like Duluth, Two Harbors, and Proctor. Even though it’s the lowest level of offense, it is still a formal acknowledgment by the justice system that you violated the law.

Subsequent Violation Within Five Years: Misdemeanor

If you are convicted of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 a second or subsequent time within five years of a previous conviction for the same offense, the charge elevates significantly to a misdemeanor. A misdemeanor conviction in Minnesota carries a potential jail sentence of up to 90 days and/or a fine of up to $1,000. This is a substantial jump from a petty misdemeanor. Not only does it expose you to incarceration, but a misdemeanor conviction also carries a much heavier stigma and can have even more profound impacts on your criminal record, professional licenses, and fundamental rights. The state takes repeat offenses much more seriously, and so should you.

The Battle Plan: Building Your Strategic Defense

An Accusation is Not a Conviction: The Fight Starts Now

Let me be absolutely clear: an accusation from the state of Minnesota is not a conviction. It is merely the beginning of their attempt to prove their case against you, and it is the precise moment when your fight for freedom and your future begins. Do not be intimidated by the overwhelming resources of the prosecution, their badge, or their legal jargon. They are not infallible, and their case is often built on assumptions, circumstantial evidence, or incomplete information. Your world may feel like it’s collapsing, but this is the moment to stand firm. This is the moment to launch a strategic counter-offensive, to challenge every assertion, and to force the state to prove every single element of their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

My approach is not passive. I don’t wait for the state to make their moves. From the moment you retain me, we will begin dissecting their case, identifying weaknesses, and building a robust defense tailored to your specific circumstances. We will investigate the details in Duluth, examine the evidence from St. Louis County, and look for inconsistencies in every report from Two Harbors to Bemidji. We will scrutinize the police procedures, challenge the credibility of witnesses, and explore every available legal avenue to protect your rights. This isn’t just about reacting to the prosecution; it’s about proactively shaping the narrative, controlling the flow of information, and ultimately, forcing the state to confront the undeniable weaknesses in their accusation. Your defense is not a hope; it is a meticulously crafted battle plan.

How a Sale of Nicotine Delivery Products to Persons Under Age 21 Charge Can Be Challenged in Court

Every accusation, no matter how confident the prosecution seems, has vulnerabilities. A charge of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 is no different. My job is to exploit those weaknesses, to uncover every possible angle of defense, and to meticulously construct a case that challenges the state’s narrative. Here are some of the key ways we can fight this charge in court:

Insufficient Proof of Age

This defense directly challenges the prosecution’s ability to prove the recipient was indeed under 21.

Mistaken Identity or Appearance: The individual appearing to be underage may have looked older than their actual age, or their identification might have been misleading. This is a common issue, especially in fast-paced retail environments in places like Proctor or Cloquet.
Lack of Proper Age Verification Procedures: If the establishment did not have or follow clear procedures for verifying age (e.g., asking for ID, using a scanner), this can be used to argue that the defendant could not reasonably confirm the buyer’s age.
Undercover Operation Flaws: In sting operations, if the undercover minor provided inconsistent information or failed to present identification when asked, it can undermine the state’s claim that the defendant knew or should have known their age.

Good Faith Reliance on Proof of Age (Affirmative Defense)

Minnesota law specifically allows for an affirmative defense if you can prove you reasonably and in good faith relied on proof of age.

Valid Identification Presented: If the underage individual presented a seemingly valid driver’s license, state ID, or other official proof of age indicating they were 21 or older, and you had no reason to believe it was fraudulent, this can be a powerful defense.
Training and Policy Adherence: Demonstrating that you or your employees received proper training on age verification and adhered to established store policies for checking IDs strengthens this defense. This shows a good faith effort to comply with the law.
Technological Verification: If an ID scanner was used and indicated the person was of age, this provides concrete evidence of good faith reliance. Even if the ID was ultimately fake, the fact that a diligent effort was made to verify can be a strong argument.

Product Not Covered by the Statute

This defense focuses on the nature of the product itself, arguing it doesn’t fall under the specific definitions of the statute.

Product is Tobacco or Electronic Delivery Device: The statute explicitly excludes traditional tobacco and electronic delivery devices as defined in a separate section. If the product sold was indeed one of these, then this specific statute (609.6855) does not apply.
Not Intended for Human Consumption: If the product, despite containing nicotine or lobelia, was clearly not intended for human consumption (e.g., a novelty item, a pet product), then the elements of the crime are not met.
FDA Authorized Product: Subdivision 1(c) of the statute provides an exception for products that are drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration. If the product falls into this category, its sale to an underage person is exempt under this specific law.

Lack of Knowledge or Intent

While intent isn’t always a direct element, proving a lack of knowledge can weaken the prosecution’s overall case, especially if it was an employee’s action.

Employee Action Without Employer Knowledge: If an employee made the sale without your knowledge, direct instruction, or negligent supervision, especially if you had clear policies against such sales, it can be argued that you, as the business owner, are not criminally liable.
Accidental Furnishing: In rare cases, if the product was accidentally given or left for an underage person without any intent to furnish, it might be argued that the necessary element of “furnishing” was not met in a criminal sense.
Misunderstanding of Regulations: While ignorance of the law is not an excuse, a genuine misunderstanding of the specific regulations surrounding these newer products, especially in a rapidly evolving legal landscape, can sometimes be used to mitigate the perceived culpability.

Defense in Action: Scenarios in Northern Minnesota

The legal battle against a charge of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21 isn’t fought in a vacuum; it’s fought in the specific context of your life and the communities of Northern Minnesota. Every case is unique, and a successful defense strategy must be tailored to the precise circumstances. Here are some scenarios demonstrating how a focused defense can be applied:

Scenario in Bemidji: The Employee Error

In Bemidji, a local convenience store owner, Ms. Peterson, is charged after a police sting operation. An undercover minor successfully purchased a nicotine pouch product from her store. Ms. Peterson insists she has clear policies in place requiring ID checks for all age-restricted products and has trained her employees thoroughly. The sale occurred when Ms. Peterson was not present, and it was an inexperienced new employee who failed to ask for identification.

Here, the defense would focus on Lack of Knowledge or Intent, specifically Employee Action Without Employer Knowledge. I would gather evidence of Ms. Peterson’s robust training program, employee manuals, and regular reminders about ID verification. We would show that she had taken reasonable steps to prevent such sales and that the employee’s error was a deviation from established policy, not a result of her direct instruction or negligent supervision. We would argue that while the employee might be subject to consequences, Ms. Peterson herself should not bear criminal liability.

Scenario in Cloquet: The Fraudulent ID

Mr. Davies, who runs a small smoke shop in Cloquet, is accused after selling a vape product that contains nicotine, but is not an “electronic delivery device” as defined by the statute, to an individual who appeared to be in their mid-20s. The individual presented a sophisticated fake ID that passed the shop’s standard visual inspection and even a basic handheld ID scanner, indicating they were 22. It was only later, after police reviewed surveillance footage and cross-referenced databases, that the ID was confirmed as fraudulent and the individual as 19.

This scenario is a prime example for the Good Faith Reliance on Proof of Age affirmative defense. I would emphasize Mr. Davies’s diligent efforts to verify age, including the use of a scanner and his reliance on what appeared to be a legitimate ID. We would highlight the sophistication of the fake identification and argue that a “reasonable and in good faith” reliance on such a convincing false document should absolve him of criminal liability under the statute. This defense shifts the burden to the prosecution to disprove his good faith belief.

Scenario in Two Harbors: The Product Classification Dispute

A small general store in Two Harbors, primarily serving tourists and locals, sold a specific herbal product advertised as a “lobelia blend” to a 20-year-old. The product contains lobelia, but the store owner, Mr. Jensen, believed it was an herbal remedy and not subject to the same restrictions as nicotine products or regulated tobacco/e-cigarettes. The prosecution argues it falls under “lobelia, whether natural or synthetic, intended for human consumption” as defined in the statute.

Here, the defense would center on Product Not Covered by the Statute, focusing on the interpretation of “lobelia, whether natural or synthetic, intended for human consumption.” We would argue that the product, as marketed and understood, did not meet the legislative intent of a “nicotine delivery product” despite containing lobelia, and that the statute’s language is ambiguous regarding certain herbal preparations. We might also explore if the product could be classified under the FDA Authorized Product exception if it had any medicinal claims that were regulated.

Scenario in Proctor: The Misunderstood Transaction

A college student living in Proctor, visiting a friend’s apartment, leaves a new, unopened package of nicotine pouches on a counter. His friend’s younger sibling, who is 19, comes over and, seeing the package, takes one without the student’s knowledge or permission. The sibling’s parent later finds it and, assuming the college student sold it, reports him to the authorities. The student is then charged with furnishing.

In this case, the defense would strongly argue Lack of Knowledge or Intent, specifically Accidental Furnishing. We would present evidence that there was no “sale, giving, or otherwise furnishing” by the college student. The product was simply left in an apartment where multiple people had access, and the underage individual took it without the student’s active participation or consent. This defense directly challenges the prosecution’s ability to prove the active “furnishing” element required by the statute, highlighting that the item was taken, not provided.

The Advocate: Why a Dedicated Duluth Defense Attorney is Essential

Countering the Resources of the State

When you’re charged with selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21, you’re not just facing a local police officer or a single prosecutor; you’re up against the entire apparatus of the state of Minnesota. This includes seasoned prosecutors with dedicated staff, investigators, and access to significant financial resources. They have the power of the law on their side, and their goal is to secure a conviction. Trying to navigate this labyrinth alone, without a deep understanding of legal strategy, courtroom procedure, and the nuances of Minnesota law, is akin to bringing a knife to a gunfight. Their resources are vast, their experience is formidable, and they are prepared to use every tool at their disposal to build a case against you. You need someone who can meet that power with equal, if not greater, force and precision.

A dedicated Duluth defense attorney levels the playing field. I understand the tactics the prosecution employs, their strengths, and more importantly, their weaknesses. I know how to counter their arguments, challenge their evidence, and expose any procedural missteps or constitutional violations. I can access resources for independent investigations, consult with experts if necessary, and meticulously prepare a defense that directly addresses the state’s allegations. This isn’t just about showing up to court; it’s about strategizing, anticipating, and aggressively advocating on your behalf against a powerful opponent. Without someone relentlessly fighting back, the state’s narrative often goes unchallenged, leading to outcomes that can devastate your future.

Strategic Command of the St. Louis County Courts

The legal landscape in Northern Minnesota, particularly within St. Louis County, is unique. Each court, each prosecutor’s office, and even individual judges have their own procedures, preferences, and unwritten rules. Simply knowing the law isn’t enough; you need an attorney with strategic command of the local court system. This includes understanding how cases are handled in Duluth, the specific approaches taken by prosecutors in the county seat, and the expectations of judges overseeing cases originating from areas like Two Harbors, Proctor, and Cloquet. Without this intimate knowledge, even a strong legal argument can fall flat due to procedural missteps or a failure to anticipate local customs.

My experience navigating the St. Louis County courts provides you with a distinct advantage. I know the local players, the typical plea bargaining ranges, and the unstated pressures that influence case outcomes. This allows me to strategically position your case, whether through aggressive negotiation, targeted motion practice, or a readiness to take your fight to trial. I can advise you on the most effective path forward, not just based on the letter of the law, but on the practical realities of the local justice system. This strategic command means your defense isn’t just theoretical; it’s a living, breathing plan designed for success in the very courts where your future will be decided.

Fighting for Your Story, Not Just the Police Report

When you are accused of a crime like selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21, the state’s case is built primarily on the police report and their interpretation of events. This report is often a sterile, one-sided narrative, devoid of context, nuance, and your perspective. It reduces a complex human interaction to a series of alleged facts designed to fit the elements of a crime. The state is not interested in your intentions, your efforts to comply with the law, or the unforeseen circumstances that may have led to the accusation. They are interested in securing a conviction based on their limited, often biased, view.

My role is to fight for your story. I will tirelessly investigate every detail, speak with witnesses, and uncover any evidence that explains the situation from your point of view. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding, a deceptive individual, or a simple, good-faith mistake. These critical elements rarely make it into a police report but are essential to a fair outcome. I will ensure that the court and, if necessary, a jury, hears the full, compelling account of what truly happened, not just the prosecution’s incomplete version. Your reputation and your future depend on someone who can articulate your side of the story with force and conviction, turning a cold police report into a nuanced defense.

An Unwavering Commitment to a Winning Result

From the moment you walk through my door in Duluth, facing the uncertainty of a charge like selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21, my commitment to you becomes absolute and unwavering. I do not view your case as simply another file; I see a life disrupted, a future threatened, and a fight that demands relentless dedication. There is no such thing as a minor criminal charge when it is your freedom, your livelihood, and your reputation on the line. My focus is singular: to achieve the best possible outcome for you, whether that means a complete dismissal of charges, a favorable plea agreement, or an aggressive defense at trial.

This commitment means I will leave no stone unturned in preparing your defense. I will spend the necessary time to understand every aspect of your situation, from the precise details of the accusation in St. Louis County to the broader impact it has on your family and community in places like Bemidji. I will communicate with you clearly and consistently, ensuring you understand every step of the process and every option available. My resolve to protect your rights and secure a winning result is not negotiable. I am your advocate, your shield, and your sword in this fight, and I will stand with you every step of the way until justice is served.

Your Questions Answered

What is the maximum penalty for a first-time conviction of selling nicotine delivery products to someone under 21?

For a first violation, the maximum penalty is a petty misdemeanor, which carries a potential fine of up to $300. While there is no jail time for a petty misdemeanor, it still results in a criminal record that can have significant lasting consequences on your life in Northern Minnesota.

How does this charge differ from selling tobacco to minors?

Minnesota Statute 609.6855 specifically targets products containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia that are not traditional tobacco products or electronic delivery devices (vapes) as defined in a separate statute (609.685). Other laws govern the sale of tobacco and electronic delivery devices to minors.

Can I fight this charge if I genuinely thought the person was 21?

Yes, absolutely. Minnesota law provides an affirmative defense if you can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that you reasonably and in good faith relied on proof of age as described in section 340A.503, subdivision 6. This is a critical defense for honest business owners in Duluth.

What kind of “proof of age” is acceptable?

Acceptable proof of age typically includes a valid driver’s license, Minnesota identification card, or other official government-issued identification that clearly indicates the person is 21 years of age or older. Relying on someone’s word or appearance is usually not considered sufficient.

Will a conviction affect my job or ability to get a job?

Yes, even a petty misdemeanor conviction can appear on background checks, potentially creating barriers to employment, especially for jobs requiring trust, a clean record, or positions in regulated industries. This is a significant concern for those working in communities like Cloquet or Proctor.

What if an employee made the sale without my knowledge?

If an employee made the sale without your knowledge or direct instruction, and you had clear policies and provided adequate training to prevent such sales, it might be possible to argue that you, as the owner, should not be held criminally liable under a theory of lack of knowledge.

Does this law apply to all nicotine products?

No, the law specifically excludes traditional tobacco products and electronic delivery devices (vapes) that are covered under a different statute. It focuses on other products containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia intended for human consumption that fall outside those categories.

What is “lobelia” in the context of this law?

Lobelia refers to products derived from the plant Lobelia inflata, also known as Indian tobacco. It contains compounds that can have effects similar to nicotine, and thus its sale to underage individuals is regulated under this statute.

Can I get community service instead of a fine?

For the person under 21 who attempts to purchase, alternative civil penalties such as community service or tobacco-free education programs are possible. For the person accused of selling, a fine is the typical penalty for a petty misdemeanor. However, a skilled attorney can sometimes negotiate alternatives or a more favorable outcome.

What happens if this isn’t my first offense?

If you have a previous conviction for the same offense within five years, a subsequent violation elevates to a misdemeanor, which carries much more severe penalties, including potential jail time of up to 90 days and a fine of up to $1,000.

How important is surveillance video in these cases?

Surveillance video can be incredibly important. It can either corroborate the prosecution’s claims or, more favorably for the defense, show that the individual appeared to be of age, that proper ID checks were performed, or that the transaction wasn’t as the state alleges.

What if I was entrapped by law enforcement?

If you believe you were unfairly coerced or induced by law enforcement to commit the offense, an entrapment defense may be possible. This is a complex legal argument that requires careful analysis of the specific facts of the sting operation.

How long does a criminal record for this offense last?

A criminal conviction, even for a petty misdemeanor, can remain on your record indefinitely. While some offenses can be expunged, the process is not automatic and has specific eligibility requirements and waiting periods.

Should I talk to the police if they contact me about this charge?

Absolutely not. You have the right to remain silent, and you should exercise that right. Anything you say can and will be used against you. Contact a dedicated Duluth defense attorney immediately before speaking with any law enforcement official.

What if the product I sold was FDA-approved?

Minnesota Statute 609.6855, subdivision 1(c), states that a product containing or delivering nicotine or lobelia may be sold to persons under 21 if it’s a drug, device, or combination product authorized for sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration. This can be a strong defense if applicable.

Sale Of Nicotine Delivery Products To Persons Under Age 21