What Is Private Property Trespassing in Minnesota?
Trespassing in Minnesota can occur on your residential property just as easily as it can on commercial or agricultural land. The act of trespassing is essentially a violation of the possessory rights of the owner, or the person in possession, of any kind of property – residential or otherwise – in Minnesota.
Trespassing laws, however, vary by state. In Minnesota, there are specific laws regarding what actions constitute trespassing or unlawful intrusion, and what actions are allowed. In some cases, the law is broken if an individual enters private property with a malicious intent despite not having been invited by the property owner.
The important thing to note is that it doesn’t have to be explicit intent on the part of the intruder to be charged with trespassing. If you’ve asked someone to leave your property and they are refusing to do so, then you can file a claim whether or not the individual is trying to make trouble.
Generally speaking, there are two key factors in determining whether malicious intent exists with regard to trespassing on your property: knowledge and intent .
If you witnessed that a person (or group of people) was on your property without presenting an invitation or challenge for them to be on your property, then you likely have enough evidence to warrant a trespassing charge in Minnesota.
Consider the situation of your neighbor’s children entering your yard regularly to retrieve a ball – do you call the police every time? Probably not. However, in addition to being able to remove the ball without notice to you, once it’s in your yard and being used as a toy, does your neighbor have the right to enter your yard for any reason? Not necessarily.
When the neighbor’s kid has the ball, your intent is clear – you want the ball back. Their intent is no doubt clear – to hold onto the ball. But there is intent to trespass on the part of the intruder even if it wasn’t to cause trouble – and now that’s a legal issue.
As soon as the ball is intentionally grabbed and held onto, it becomes an illegal object – that kid is now trespassing. It’s the same with the invasion of your home versus a neighboring home – intent isn’t always the issue.
Minnesota Trespassing Penalties and Fines
The potential legal consequences for trespassing on private property can be divided into two classes: non-criminal and criminal. Non-criminal penalties are generally fines and other civil sanctions imposed by a private party such as a property owner, business or homeowners’ association. A common example is a fine imposed against a property owner for feeding wild deer in violation of a local ordinance.
Criminal penalties are commonly imposed against a trespasser not only by private owners of the property or land, but by the state as well. If a property owner or manager discovers a trespasser on his property, he may call the police or sheriff. Under many circumstances, police may issue a warning against the trespasser or issue a citation or arrest him if the trespasser has committed a crime. A trespasser poses an immediate threat when he or she is on the property without the permission of the owner and is committing or plans to commit a crime. The most common crimes that result in illegal access to private property are stealing, damaging or defacing property, the sale of drugs, arson, or sex crimes.
If a trespasser is caught in the act of committing a crime, Minnesota law allows the police to issue a citation and or arrest the trespasser. Charges may be misdemeanors or felonies, depending on the nature and severity of the crime.
Trespassing cases often arise from conflicts between the trespasser and the landowner due to the trespasser’s difficult or unsafe behavior. A trespasser can face significant criminal liability for willfully remaining on the property after being warned to leave. A landowner may obtain a restraining order against a trespasser who disregards a "no trespass" order and returns to the property after he has been ordered not to return. The landowner obtains a restraining order by filing a lawsuit against the alleged trespasser in which he alleges that the alleged trespasser has been on his property, after being asked to leave. If the court finds that the trespasser has been on the plaintiff’s property without permission and against the plaintiff’s wishes, it can issue a restraining order prohibiting the trespasser from ever returning to the property again. Violation of the restraining order could result in imprisonment.
Even if there are no restrictions imposed against future contact with the landowner, a trespassing conviction can be pivotal in both custody and divorce cases. If there is a history of trespassing on the landowner’s part, the person may be ordered by the court to refrain from confronting the trespasser. In other words, a landowner who suffers from emotional or physical abuse may be able to set up physical barriers to abuses from taking place on his property. Additionally, if the trespasser is guilty of another crime, the landowner may be able to obtain a restraining order prohibiting the person from going to the property regardless of whether the owner is present or not.
Trespassing Defense Strategies
There are several possible defenses to trespassing in Minnesota. These defenses, although they can be nuanced and specific to the situation, are important considerations when facing a criminal charge for trespassing. Taking the time to understand these defenses in detail can also be helpful when it comes to avoiding a criminal charge for trespassing at all.
Consent
One of the most common defenses to a criminal charge of trespassing is that the defendant had consent to be on the property or engage in the behavior in question. In many cases this is an easy defense to use when the property is owned by a family member or close friend who has given consent but was not available to provide that testimony in court. A more difficult situation arises, however, when the property owner did not give consent. In this case, the potential exists to demonstrate that the property owner would have consented if he had known the full facts or had time to consent. In other words, it is possible to show that the property owner would not have objected if given the opportunity.
Misunderstanding
Another defense to trespassing charges is that the defendant misunderstood the nature of the situation. For example, say a person walks onto a street and begins verbally interacting with passersby without their consent. The defendant may have believed that they were in a city area or otherwise in the public eye where free speech was allowed. An experienced trespassing attorney may be able to demonstrate that the defendant was confused about their location and believed they had naively entered a free speech area by mistake.
Mistake of Fact
Sometimes the trespassing charge comes about because of a misconception about the nature of a specific object or area. For example, if someone throws what they believe to be an old soda can into the neighbor’s yard, and it turns out to be an antique, a mistake of fact defense could apply. Similarly, if the defendant is drugged or intoxicated by someone else, any trespassing that occurs while under the influence of such a substance can be difficult to attribute to a person that was not in control of themselves. Often, this type of defense can be applied to cases of breaking and entering. For example, if a defendant believes they are entering into an abandoned building when the building is still in fact inhabited, this could be mistaken for an abandoned property and worked into the defense strategy to avoid a conviction.
Warning and Sign Requirements
Under Minnesota trespass law, a property owner is required to give notice to the public that entry on the property is prohibited. This is accomplished by erecting a sign or other physical barrier and/or by providing personal warning. If the property owner’s intent is only to allow the presence of a few specific individuals, it is also possible to confront those individuals and inform them that trespass is prohibited. However, a sign with a general message is usually sufficient for deterrence purposes.
Minnesota Statutes section 609.605 prohibits entry on land by any person who has been given actual or constructive notice that entry is prohibited. A property owner can give constructive notice by posting signs basically anywhere in Minnesota. Signs are not required to be on the boundary of the property in order to be effective. For example, it is not uncommon for property owners to post signs on their house when it is located a long distance from the property line. Signage does not have to be complicated or expensive to be effective. Conspicuous locations and message are all that is required by the trespass laws.
If a "No Trespassing" sign satisfies your needs for general deterrence, you should place a couple of signs on your property. It is helpful to remember that the objective of having a sign or other warning is not so much to deter those who enter the property, but to provide probable cause for a law enforcement officer to investigate a possible trespass situation. Anyone who enters your property is, by definition, doing so without permission, which means that criminal trespass statutes are being violated. The presence of signs (along with other factors) gives an officer the necessary amount of probable cause to conclude that a misdemeanor crime has occurred.
If you have an individual who you do not want on your property, you must confront that individual and inform him or her that they are not welcome. You must also generally renew the warning on a yearly basis.
Civil vs. Criminal Trespassing
When you think of trespassing, you might think of someone taking your newspaper off the edge of your driveway or a stranger stepping foot into your yard to retrieve their lost frisbee. Or you may envision the local mall’s security team escorting a rogue car thief to the parking lot entrance after he was caught trying to "hotwire" the vehicle. These two scenarios are both examples of the law of trespassing, but the Minnesota statute treats these situations differently. One example is a civil issue while the other example is a criminal matter. A civil issue involves a dispute between two parties that can be resolved through money or the courts. In contrast, a criminal matter continuously carries the possibility of jail time for the offender.
Civil Trespassing
The commercial real estate law of Minnesota considers trespassing a civil matter. In this case, "trespass" simply refers to the fact that someone else is using your land, regardless of their intent. In this case, the "trespassers" are noted as "fence-cutters." Minnesota law defines fence-cutters as anyone who intentionally enters the land without the proper permission or compensation . For example, suppose your neighbor builds a fence that cuts off access from his yard to the street without notifying you. You could file a civil suit to demand a change in his property line. Likewise, if someone is fishing on your pond without your permission, you could sue them for fishing on your private property.
Criminal Trespassing
The second type of trespassing in Minnesota involves a criminal charge. People who are charged with criminal trespassing may face jail time and/or fines. In Minnesota, people trespass on a person’s property when they knowingly enter the land or enter onto the property and are told to leave but do not. There is one exception to this law—if someone was invited onto the land and then stayed past the end of the invitation, they may be charged with a crime. First-degree trespass is when someone enters a dwelling without consent. Second-degree trespass is when someone enters a building or construction site where someone else has a legitimate right to be, at night, without authorization. A conviction for first-degree trespassing in Minnesota can lead to a maximum of five years in jail or a $10,000 fine. For a second-degree trespassing conviction, you may be sentenced to up to one year in prison or a $3,000 fine.
Questions About the Impact of Trespassing on Property
While property owners in Minnesota have an affirmative duty to "reasonably accommodate" a person’s disability in entering or using their property within the confines of the law, it is important to note that this is no carte blanche.
Minnesota law makes clear that when a person enters private property without permission, he or she is not treated favorably under the law. The Minnesota trespass statutes allow owners to eject, by force if necessary, a person who refuses to leave their property after notice to depart is issued. Trespassing is not a criminal misdemeanor in Minnesota; however, a landowner or possessor can initiate a civil action for trespass if an individual enters private property without authorization.
Minnesota civil courts can provide permanent and temporary injunctive relief, order the removal of a person from private premises, award treble damages, and issue a writ to the county sheriff or another authorized peace officer, commanding the officer to enter the property and remove the person from the premises. For purposes of the Minnesota trespass statutes, "nighttime" is defined as 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. the next day, meaning individuals may be only be asked to leave during those times.
The impact of trespass is substantial. While anti-discrimination laws require reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities, they do not grant an individual the right to remain on property that the owner has requested an outsider to leave.
Private Property Trespass Trial Examples in Minnesota
Since the law on private trespass is so specific, you often want to research what trespass to private property cases have been analyzed by the Minnesota courts (and appellate courts) so that you can see how this clear cut rule has been applied. Most trespassing cases in Minnesota are not runaway affairs. They are often what could be considered routine arrests or instances by a landowner to remove a would-be trespasser. These following examples illustrate detainees who do not leave an expanse of land after being asked to do so and use a defense of right to be on the land. The first two incidents are trespass to private property as a result of a domain dispute on the land belonging to the City of Minneapolis: State v. Klossner 230 Minn. 435, 42 N.W.2d 444 (1950), cert. denied 340 U.S. 883, 71 S.Ct. 133, 95 L.Ed. 650 (1950). Defendant brought a quarreling lease action in federal court. Plaintiff counterclaimed for land trespass, but the court stayed the land trespass action and declared the lease forfeited. Defendant then owed Plaintiff storage money (without interest). Defendant claimed the money was a security deposit and gave that as a defense of breaking the terms of a legally binding contract. This time the federal district court found for Plaintiff: Land trespass was valid. The case was removed to State Court. The County Court ruled that Defendant had done nothing wrong as the City was in the habit of relinquishing its property to Defendant even in prior actions. The Supreme Court ruled for Plaintiff. Upon entry to a land purchase from the City, Defendant was granted use of land and exclusive license. If the City had sued immediately for trespass to property, it would have been valid. However, by waiting and then granting use of land as an office and a garage, as well as decree of a garage sale, the City had parted with the use to the Defendant as much as with possession. The Supreme Court voided the County Court’s decision and ruled for the Plaintiff. The following incident based out of Hennepin County ended in an acquittal: State v. Khamir Minnesota, Hennepin County District Court, 10-CR-08-180499. This case involves incidents at the Hennepin County District Court. There were four cases of trespass to private property. All cases were dismissed.
Identifying the Right Legal Resources
The courts and police in Minnesota take trespassing very seriously. When an accusation of being on a person’s private property without permission is made the alleged trespasser can be quickly found and subject to charges. Even when not a criminal case, situations involving real property and trespass can be a burden for front lines law enforcement and the courts to deal with. But , with that said, it does not mean you cannot find quick and available legal help if you are accused of trespassing or conversely if you are the property owner dealing with a trespasser. Legal aid societies in Minnesota as well as attorney referral services can both quickly help you find an attorney. LawHelpMN.org is a great place to start looking for a way to handle a trespasser or a trespass.
+ There are no comments
Add yours