False Imprisonment Attorney MN | Duluth Lawyer 609.255

Fighting a False Imprisonment Accusation in St. Louis County with a Dedicated Defense Attorney

The moment you learn you are under investigation or have been charged with false imprisonment in Northern Minnesota, your world can shatter. In an instant, the security you once knew, the stability of your family, and your standing in close-knit communities like Duluth or Two Harbors, are thrown into disarray. A criminal accusation is not merely a legal problem; it is a profound personal crisis that invades every aspect of your life. The weight of the state, with all its resources and power, suddenly feels like it’s pressing down on you, threatening to extinguish everything you’ve worked for. This is a terrifying and isolating experience, leaving many feeling lost and without a clear path forward.

The initial shock can quickly give way to a torrent of urgent questions and deep anxieties. How will this affect your job, your ability to provide for your loved ones, or your hard-earned reputation in a town like Proctor? Will your neighbors, friends, and colleagues view you differently? The fear of the unknown, combined with the daunting complexity of the legal system, can be paralyzing. However, an accusation is precisely that – an accusation. It is the beginning of a fight, not the end of your life or your future. What you do in these critical early moments, and who stands beside you, will determine the outcome.

The Stakes: What a Conviction Truly Costs

A conviction for false imprisonment carries far more than just the immediate penalties handed down by a court. It casts a long, dark shadow that can follow you for the rest of your life, impacting your freedom, your rights, and your ability to rebuild. Understanding these profound, long-term consequences is essential to grasping the true stakes of the fight ahead.

Your Permanent Criminal Record

A conviction for false imprisonment will result in a permanent criminal record. This record is not something that simply fades away with time; it is a public mark that can be accessed by potential employers, landlords, licensing boards, and even loan officers. It signifies that the state has formally declared you guilty of a crime involving the confinement or restraint of another person. Such a record can dramatically limit your opportunities and force you to live under the constant burden of past legal issues, making it difficult to move forward with your life in Northern Minnesota and beyond.

Loss of Second Amendment Rights

One of the most significant and often overlooked consequences of a felony conviction, including certain levels of false imprisonment, is the loss of your Second Amendment rights. Under both federal and Minnesota law, individuals convicted of certain crimes are prohibited from possessing firearms. This is not a temporary restriction; it is typically a permanent ban. For many in communities like Bemidji or Cloquet, where hunting, sport shooting, or personal protection are integral parts of their lives, this loss can be devastating and feel like a fundamental aspect of their identity has been stripped away.

Barriers to Employment and Housing

A criminal record, particularly one involving a crime like false imprisonment, erects significant barriers to securing stable employment and housing. Many employers conduct background checks, and a felony conviction can immediately disqualify you from a wide range of jobs, even those unrelated to the nature of the crime. Landlords are often hesitant to rent to individuals with criminal histories, fearing potential risks or disturbances. This can create a cycle of instability, making it incredibly challenging to find a place to live or to support yourself and your family after a conviction.

Impact on Professional Licenses and Reputation

For those holding professional licenses in fields such as healthcare, education, or finance, a false imprisonment conviction can lead to the suspension or revocation of their license, effectively ending their career. Even without a formal license, your personal and professional reputation in communities like Proctor or Two Harbors will suffer immense damage. A criminal accusation, let alone a conviction, can alienate friends, colleagues, and community members, leading to social ostracization and making it difficult to regain trust and respect.

The Accusation: Understanding the State’s Case

To fight an accusation, you must first understand what you are up against. The state’s case is built on specific legal definitions and evidentiary requirements. Demystifying these legal complexities is a crucial first step in preparing your defense.

What Does the State Allege? False Imprisonment Explained in Plain English

False imprisonment, under Minnesota law, generally refers to the intentional confinement or restraint of another person without their consent and without lawful authority. This isn’t just about physically locking someone in a room; it can involve any action that makes a person believe they are not free to leave, whether through threats, intimidation, or physical barriers. The law also distinguishes between the intentional restraint of an adult without their consent and, more severely, the intentional restraint of a child under 18 without the consent of their parent or legal custodian.

Furthermore, Minnesota law addresses the specific and particularly egregious offense of “unreasonable restraint of children.” This subdivision focuses on situations where a parent, legal guardian, or caretaker intentionally subjects a child to cruel and excessive physical confinement, using methods like tying, locking, caging, or chaining for a prolonged period. This particular charge recognizes the vulnerability of children and the immense harm that can come from such abusive acts, carrying increasingly severe penalties depending on whether the restraint results in demonstrable or substantial bodily harm to the child.

The Law on the Books: Minnesota Statute 609.255

Minnesota Statute 609.255 defines the crime of false imprisonment, outlining both the general intentional restraint of individuals and the specific offense of unreasonable restraint of children by caregivers. Understanding the precise language of this statute is fundamental to any defense strategy.

609.255 FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

Subdivision 1.Definition.	As used in this section, the following term has the meaning given it unless specific content indicates otherwise.
	"Caretaker" means an individual who has responsibility for the care of a child as a result of a family relationship, or who has assumed responsibility for all or a portion of the care of a child.
Subd. 2.Intentional restraint.	Whoever, knowingly lacking lawful authority to do so, intentionally confines or restrains someone else's child under the age of 18 years without consent of the child's parent or legal custodian, or any other person without the person's consent, is guilty of false imprisonment and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than three years or to payment of a fine of not more than $5,000, or both.
Subd. 3.Unreasonable restraint of children.	(a) A parent, legal guardian, or caretaker who intentionally subjects a child under the age of 18 years to unreasonable physical confinement or restraint by means including but not limited to, tying, locking, caging, or chaining for a prolonged period of time and in a cruel manner which is excessive under the circumstances, is guilty of unreasonable restraint of a child and, except as provided in paragraph (b) or (c), may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 364 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both.
	(b) If the confinement or restraint results in demonstrable bodily harm, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than two years or to payment of a fine of not more than $4,000, or both.
	(c) If the confinement or restraint results in substantial bodily harm, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.

The Prosecution’s Burden: Elements of False Imprisonment

In any criminal case, the burden of proof rests squarely on the prosecution. To secure a conviction for false imprisonment, the state must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, every single element of the crime as defined by law. If the prosecutor fails to prove even one of these elements, their entire case collapses, and the charges against you cannot stand. This is a fundamental principle of our justice system and forms the bedrock of a strong defense. The specifics of these elements depend on whether the charge is for general intentional restraint or for unreasonable restraint of a child.

Knowingly Lacking Lawful Authority: This element requires the prosecution to prove that you acted without any legal right or justification to confine or restrain the individual. Lawful authority could stem from a court order, a recognized legal duty (like a police officer making an arrest), or even certain emergency situations. The state must demonstrate that no such authority existed for your actions.
Intentionally Confines or Restrains: The state must establish that your actions were deliberate and not accidental. This means you purposefully restricted another person’s freedom of movement. It’s not enough that someone felt confined; the prosecution must show you acted with the specific intent to confine or restrain them. This could involve physical barriers, threats, or other coercive means.
Someone Else’s Child Under 18 Years Without Parental Consent OR Any Other Person Without Their Consent: This element defines the victim and the critical absence of permission. If the alleged victim is a minor, the prosecution must prove they were under 18 and that their parent or legal custodian did not consent to the confinement. If the alleged victim is an adult, the prosecution must prove they did not consent to being confined or restrained. Lack of consent is a cornerstone of this charge.
Parent, Legal Guardian, or Caretaker (for Unreasonable Restraint of Children): For charges under subdivision 3, the prosecution must first establish that the accused held a specific relationship to the child – that of a parent, legal guardian, or caretaker. This narrows the scope of the charge to those with a direct responsibility for the child’s care.
Unreasonable Physical Confinement or Restraint by Certain Means (for Unreasonable Restraint of Children): This element requires the state to prove that the methods of confinement used were “unreasonable” and included means like tying, locking, caging, or chaining. It goes beyond simple discipline, focusing on methods that are inherently cruel and excessive for a child.
For a Prolonged Period of Time and in a Cruel Manner Which is Excessive Under the Circumstances (for Unreasonable Restraint of Children): The prosecution must demonstrate that the confinement was not brief or temporary, but rather extended in duration, and that the manner in which it was carried out was cruel and went beyond any reasonable justification given the circumstances. This element emphasizes the severity and abusive nature of the act.

The Potential Outcome: Penalties for a False Imprisonment Conviction

A conviction for false imprisonment is a grave matter, carrying the potential for significant penalties that can drastically alter your life. The specific severity of these penalties depends on the precise nature of the charge under Minnesota Statute 609.255, particularly whether it involves the general intentional restraint of a person or the more serious unreasonable restraint of a child, and if so, whether bodily harm resulted.

Intentional Restraint (Subdivision 2):This charge, often referred to as general false imprisonment, can result in imprisonment for not more than three years, or a fine of not more than $5,000, or both. This level of penalty underscores the state’s view of infringing upon an individual’s freedom of movement as a serious offense.
Unreasonable Restraint of Children (Subdivision 3(a)):If the unreasonable restraint of a child does not result in demonstrable or substantial bodily harm, the potential penalties include imprisonment for not more than 364 days, or a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. While a misdemeanor-level offense, it still carries significant consequences, including potential jail time and a criminal record.
Unreasonable Restraint of Children with Demonstrable Bodily Harm (Subdivision 3(b)):When the unreasonable confinement or restraint of a child results in “demonstrable bodily harm,” the penalties escalate significantly. A conviction can lead to imprisonment for not more than two years, or a fine of not more than $4,000, or both. “Demonstrable bodily harm” refers to harm that is visible and verifiable, even if not severe.
Unreasonable Restraint of Children with Substantial Bodily Harm (Subdivision 3(c)):The most severe penalties for unreasonable restraint of children apply when the confinement results in “substantial bodily harm.” This level of harm implies a greater degree of injury and carries the potential for imprisonment for not more than five years, or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. A conviction at this level is a felony with severe long-term ramifications.

The Battle Plan: Building Your Strategic Defense

When facing an accusation of false imprisonment, it is crucial to remember that the legal process is a battle, not a concession. An accusation is merely the state’s initial claim, and it carries no inherent truth until proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. You are not passive bystander in this process; you are entitled to a vigorous defense, and every aspect of the state’s case must be meticulously examined, questioned, and challenged.

This is where a proactive, strategic counter-offensive begins. Your defense is not about merely reacting to the prosecution’s moves; it is about taking control, identifying weaknesses in their evidence, and presenting a compelling narrative that protects your rights and your future. The state has an immense burden to prove guilt, and any doubt, any inconsistency, or any failure to meet their burden can be leveraged to your advantage. Every piece of evidence, every witness statement, and every procedural step taken by law enforcement will be subjected to rigorous scrutiny, ensuring that your story, and the truth, are brought to light.

How a False Imprisonment Charge Can Be Challenged in Court

A false imprisonment charge, while serious, is not insurmountable. There are numerous avenues through which an experienced defense attorney can challenge the prosecution’s case, exploit weaknesses in their evidence, and argue for your innocence or a reduction of charges. Every case is unique, and a successful defense strategy is tailored to the specific facts and circumstances involved.

Lack of Intent:One of the foundational elements the prosecution must prove is that you intentionally confined or restrained the person. If it can be shown that your actions were accidental, misunderstood, or lacked the specific intent to deprive someone of their freedom, the prosecution’s case may fail.
- Accidental Confinement: If a door inadvertently locked, or a situation arose where someone felt confined due to unforeseen circumstances rather than a deliberate act on your part, this could negate the element of intent.
- Misunderstanding of Situation: There might be situations where your actions were misinterpreted by the alleged victim or witnesses. For example, if you were attempting to de-escalate a situation and someone perceived that as confinement, the intent may be challenged.
- No Purposeful Deprivation of Liberty: If the evidence shows you did not have the conscious objective or purpose to restrict the person’s movement, but rather your actions had a different, lawful purpose, the intent element is not met.
Lawful Authority:A key component of false imprisonment is that the confinement occurred without lawful authority. If you can demonstrate that you had a legal right or justifiable reason to confine or restrain the individual, the charge cannot stand.
- Parental Discipline: In cases involving children, if the restraint was a reasonable form of parental discipline and not excessive or cruel, it might fall under lawful authority. However, this defense is very narrow, especially with the “unreasonable restraint of children” statute.
- Citizen’s Arrest (Limited Scope): In very specific and rare circumstances, a private citizen may be justified in detaining someone they reasonably believe has committed a felony. This is a complex area and applies only under strict legal conditions.
- Self-Defense/Defense of Others: If the confinement was a necessary and reasonable act to protect yourself or another person from imminent harm, it could be argued that it was done with a form of lawful justification.
Consent of the Victim/Parent:If the alleged victim, or in the case of a minor, their parent or legal custodian, willingly consented to the confinement or restraint, then a crucial element of false imprisonment is missing. Consent must be voluntary and not coerced.
- Voluntary Agreement: If the alleged victim willingly agreed to stay in a particular location or to have their movement restricted, even temporarily, then false imprisonment has not occurred. This requires proving explicit or implied consent.
- Withdrawal of Consent: It is important to note that consent can be withdrawn. If consent was initially given but later revoked, and confinement continued, this defense may only apply to the period before consent was withdrawn.
- Parental Approval: For charges involving children under 18, if the child’s parent or legal custodian explicitly gave permission for the child’s confinement or restraint, this element is negated.
Lack of Confinement/Restraint:The prosecution must prove that actual confinement or restraint occurred. This means the individual’s freedom of movement was significantly restricted. If the person was free to leave at any time or was not truly confined, the charge may be challenged.
- Freedom to Leave: If the alleged victim had an obvious and reasonable means of escape, or was at no point prevented from leaving, then genuine confinement may not have taken place.
- Brief or Incidental Restriction: Minor, momentary, or incidental restrictions on movement that do not constitute a significant deprivation of liberty may not meet the legal definition of confinement or restraint.
- No Physical Barrier or Threat: If there was no physical barrier, no explicit or implied threat of force, and the person simply chose not to move, then a claim of false imprisonment may be difficult to sustain.

Defense in Action: Scenarios in Northern Minnesota

The principles of defense are best understood through real-world application. In the diverse communities of Northern Minnesota, situations leading to false imprisonment charges can arise in varied contexts. Here, we examine how strategic defenses might apply in localized scenarios.

Scenario in Bemidji:Imagine a situation in Bemidji, perhaps at a large retail store near Paul Bunyan Park, where an individual is mistakenly accused of shoplifting. A security guard, acting without proper procedure, detains the person in a back room for an extended period, refusing to let them leave until police arrive, even after it becomes clear they have no stolen merchandise. The individual feels trapped and intimidated, unable to escape the small, windowless room.In this scenario, a defense based on Lack of Lawful Authority would be paramount. While security guards have some powers, their authority to detain is limited and must be exercised reasonably and with due process. If the guard’s detention exceeded what was legally permissible, especially after realizing their mistake, or if they used excessive force or unreasonable duration, the confinement would have been without lawful authority, a key element of false imprisonment.
Scenario in Cloquet:Consider a dispute in Cloquet between divorced parents regarding child custody. One parent, feeling the other is violating a custody agreement, refuses to allow their child to leave their home to go with the other parent at a scheduled time. The child, under 18, is prevented from leaving, and the other parent calls law enforcement, alleging false imprisonment of the child. The child themselves expresses a desire to go with the other parent.Here, a defense could potentially hinge on Lawful Authority combined with the nuances of Parental Consent. While one parent might believe they are acting in the child’s best interest or within their parental rights, if a court order dictates specific custody arrangements, violating that order to confine the child against the other parent’s rights could negate lawful authority. The defense would challenge whether the actions truly constituted an intentional restraint without the legal custodian’s consent, especially if there’s an ongoing, complex custody dispute at play.
Scenario in Two Harbors:A heated domestic argument occurs in a Two Harbors home. During the dispute, one partner becomes agitated and stands in a doorway, blocking the other partner from leaving a room for a brief period, perhaps only a minute or two, before stepping aside. The partner who felt blocked calls police, alleging false imprisonment due to being prevented from leaving. There were no physical threats, only a verbal altercation and a temporary obstruction of an exit.In this case, a defense would likely focus on the Lack of Confinement/Restraint element. While the person may have felt momentarily inconvenienced or even intimidated, it would be argued whether a true “confinement” or “restraint” occurred that significantly deprived them of their liberty, particularly given the short duration and the absence of physical barriers or explicit threats of force. The defense would highlight that the alleged victim was indeed able to leave shortly thereafter, demonstrating a lack of actual imprisonment.
Scenario in Proctor:At a construction site in Proctor, a supervisor confronts an employee suspected of stealing equipment. The supervisor tells the employee to remain in a trailer office while they call the police. The employee feels compelled to stay, not explicitly told they cannot leave, but understands the implication and the presence of the supervisor outside the door. After 30 minutes, police arrive, and the employee is questioned. The employee later claims false imprisonment.Here, the defense might argue Lack of Intent or Lack of Confinement/Restraint. The supervisor’s intent might have been to secure the scene for a police investigation, not to maliciously imprison the employee. Furthermore, if the employee was not physically prevented from leaving, and merely felt implicitly pressured to stay, it could be argued that the elements of intentional confinement were not fully met. The defense would emphasize that the employee could have left, even if it felt uncomfortable, and that no active restraint occurred.

The Advocate: Why a Dedicated Duluth Defense Attorney is Essential

When your freedom, reputation, and future are on the line, you need more than just legal advice; you need a relentless advocate who understands the stakes and knows how to fight. A dedicated Duluth defense attorney is not just a guide through the legal labyrinth; they are your shield against the overwhelming power of the state and your sword in the battle for justice.

Countering the Resources of the State

The State of Minnesota, through its prosecution and law enforcement agencies, possesses vast resources. They have dedicated teams of investigators, forensic experts, and prosecutors whose sole job is to secure convictions. They have budgets, manpower, and established procedures designed to build cases against you. As an individual facing charges, you are inherently at a disadvantage against this formidable machinery. A skilled criminal defense attorney levels the playing field. They bring their own resources – their network of private investigators, forensic experts, and legal researchers – to meticulously examine every piece of evidence, uncover inconsistencies, and challenge the state’s narrative. They ensure that you are not overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the state’s apparatus.

Strategic Command of the St. Louis County Courts

Navigating the courts in St. Louis County, whether in Duluth, Virginia, or other municipal jurisdictions, requires more than just knowing the law; it demands a deep understanding of the local legal landscape. This includes familiarity with the specific judges, prosecutors, and even the unwritten rules and customs that can influence the outcome of a case. A defense attorney with extensive experience in St. Louis County courts understands these nuances. They know how to present your case effectively within this specific environment, how to anticipate the prosecution’s tactics, and how to negotiate the best possible outcomes, whether through plea bargaining or at trial. This local knowledge is an invaluable asset in the fight for your freedom.

Fighting for Your Story, Not Just the Police Report

When an accusation of false imprisonment is made, the police report often becomes the initial and primary narrative. It typically presents a one-sided account, focused on the allegations against you. However, there are always two sides to every story, and often more. A police report rarely captures the full context, the nuances of an interaction, or the motivations and perspectives that led to the incident. A dedicated defense attorney understands this fundamental imbalance and fights to ensure your story, your perspective, and the full context of the situation are heard. They diligently gather evidence, interview witnesses, and challenge the police report’s assertions to present a complete and accurate picture to the court, ensuring you are not judged solely on a biased account.

An Unwavering Commitment to a Winning Result

Facing a false imprisonment charge can feel like the end, but for a dedicated defense attorney, it is the beginning of a relentless pursuit of a winning result. This commitment goes beyond merely showing up in court; it involves an unwavering dedication to exploring every possible avenue for defense, challenging every piece of evidence, and relentlessly advocating for your best interests. It means fighting for an acquittal, a dismissal of charges, a reduction of charges, or the most favorable outcome possible given the circumstances. This commitment stems from a deep empathy for the client’s crisis and a firm belief that an accusation is not a conviction, and that with strength, strategy, and perseverance, your life can be put back on track.

Your Questions Answered

What is false imprisonment in Minnesota?

False imprisonment in Minnesota generally refers to intentionally confining or restraining someone without their consent and without lawful authority. This can apply to adults or, with specific rules, to children under 18 without parental consent. It covers both physical restriction and situations where a person reasonably believes they are not free to leave due to threats or other coercive means.

Is there a difference between false imprisonment of an adult versus a child?

Yes, Minnesota Statute 609.255 explicitly differentiates. While intentionally confining any person without consent and lawful authority is false imprisonment (Subdivision 2), there is a distinct and often more severely penalized offense called “unreasonable restraint of children” (Subdivision 3) that applies to parents, legal guardians, or caretakers who subject a child to cruel and excessive confinement.

What are the penalties for false imprisonment?

Penalties vary significantly based on the specific circumstances and the subdivision of the statute involved. For general intentional restraint, it can be up to three years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine. For unreasonable restraint of children, penalties range from up to 364 days in jail (no harm) to up to five years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine if substantial bodily harm results.

Can I be charged with false imprisonment if I didn’t physically touch someone?

Yes, physical contact is not always necessary for a false imprisonment charge. If you used threats, intimidation, or positioned yourself in a way that reasonably prevented someone from leaving, even without touching them, you could still face charges. The key is the intentional deprivation of another person’s freedom of movement.

What does “without lawful authority” mean in this context?

“Without lawful authority” means you did not have a legal right or justifiable reason to confine or restrain the person. This could include situations where police officers are making a lawful arrest, or in very limited circumstances, a citizen’s arrest. If you acted without such justification, it meets this element of the crime.

Can I consent to being falsely imprisoned?

No, if you truly consent to the confinement, it is not false imprisonment. A key element of the crime is the absence of consent from the person being confined. However, consent must be voluntary and not obtained through coercion, threats, or fraud.

What if I thought I had permission to restrain someone?

If you genuinely and reasonably believed you had permission or lawful authority to restrain someone, this could be a defense. The prosecution must prove you acted knowingly lacking lawful authority. A good faith mistake, if reasonable, could undermine the state’s case regarding your intent or knowledge.

How can a defense attorney help with a false imprisonment charge?

A defense attorney can challenge the prosecution’s evidence, negotiate with prosecutors, identify weaknesses in the state’s case, explore legal defenses like lack of intent or lawful authority, and advocate for your rights in court. They work to achieve the best possible outcome, whether it’s dismissal, reduced charges, or an acquittal.

Will a false imprisonment conviction affect my job?

Yes, a false imprisonment conviction can severely impact your employment prospects. Many employers conduct background checks, and a conviction, especially a felony, can lead to job loss or make it very difficult to find new employment, particularly in fields requiring trust or working with vulnerable populations.

What happens if I’m accused of false imprisonment in Duluth?

If accused in Duluth, your case will likely proceed through the St. Louis County court system. You would be arrested, potentially formally charged, and then go through initial appearances, pre-trial hearings, and possibly a trial. It is critical to have immediate legal representation to protect your rights from the outset.

Is false imprisonment always a felony?

No, it is not always a felony. While intentional restraint (Subdivision 2) can be a felony, “unreasonable restraint of children” (Subdivision 3) can be a gross misdemeanor (if no demonstrable bodily harm) or a felony (if demonstrable or substantial bodily harm occurs). The severity depends on the specific facts and resulting harm.

Can false imprisonment be part of a domestic violence charge?

Yes, false imprisonment can often be charged in conjunction with domestic violence incidents, particularly if one partner prevents the other from leaving a residence during an argument or disagreement. This can add to the complexity and severity of the overall charges.

What’s the difference between false imprisonment and kidnapping?

Kidnapping is a more serious offense than false imprisonment, typically involving taking or confining a person for a specific nefarious purpose, such as ransom, to commit another crime, or to terrorize the victim. False imprisonment is generally about the unlawful restraint itself, without necessarily an additional malicious purpose.

How long does a false imprisonment case take to resolve?

The timeline for a false imprisonment case can vary widely, from a few months to over a year, depending on the complexity of the case, the amount of evidence, the willingness of both sides to negotiate, and court schedules. Serious felony cases typically take longer to resolve.

Will my name appear in the newspaper if I’m charged?

Possibly. Criminal charges are generally public record, and local news outlets in Northern Minnesota may report on arrests and charges, especially for serious offenses. A conviction will certainly be part of the public record, which can impact your reputation in the community.

Can I expunge a false imprisonment conviction from my record?

Expungement rules in Minnesota are complex and depend on the specific offense, its severity, and the outcome of your case. Some convictions may be expungable after a certain period and if certain conditions are met, while others may be more difficult or impossible to expunge.

What if the alleged victim was not harmed?

Even if the alleged victim was not physically harmed, you can still be charged with false imprisonment. The crime is about the unlawful deprivation of liberty, not necessarily about causing physical injury. However, the presence or absence of harm can significantly impact the severity of the charges and potential penalties, especially for unreasonable restraint of children.