Facing Environmental Crime Charges in Minnesota?

A Minnesota Defense Lawyer Explains What a § 609.671 Accusation Means for You and Your Business

You never imagined that a business decision, a shortcut, or a simple mistake could lead to criminal charges. But now, you or your company are staring down an accusation under Minnesota Statute § 609.671, a complex and severe law governing environmental crimes. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and state prosecutors are not treating this like a simple regulatory issue; they are treating you like a criminal. You might be feeling overwhelmed by the technical nature of the allegations, blindsided by the government’s aggressive tactics, and terrified of the consequences. Perhaps the charges stem from a misunderstanding of a permit, an accident you couldn’t control, or the actions of a rogue employee. You are right to be concerned. These are not just tickets or fines; a conviction can lead to felony records, massive financial penalties, and even years in prison. Your business, your reputation, and your personal freedom are all on the line. But an accusation is not a conviction. The government has a story it wants to tell, but it is often an incomplete one. You don’t have to face this intimidating process alone. As a Minnesota criminal defense attorney with experience defending individuals and businesses from Minneapolis to Duluth and Rochester to St. Cloud, I understand how to fight back against these complex and high-stakes charges. I am here to protect your rights, your liberty, and your livelihood.

What “Environmental Crime” Actually Means in Minnesota

When you are charged under Minnesota Statute § 609.671, the government is accusing you of knowingly or negligently harming the environment in a way that breaks the law. This isn’t about accidentally putting the wrong can in the recycling bin. These are serious criminal allegations that cover a wide range of conduct, from illegal dumping of hazardous waste to polluting Minnesota’s pristine waters or air. A Minnesota environmental crime charge means prosecutors believe you, or your company, made a voluntary choice that violated a specific environmental law, rule, or permit condition. The focus is often on materials defined as “hazardous waste,” “toxic pollutants,” or “solid waste” and how they were handled.

These cases are often highly technical, revolving around complex regulations from the MPCA and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The government will try to prove you “knowingly” violated the law, which has a broad definition in this context. It doesn’t mean you had to know you were breaking a specific rule; it can simply mean you were aware of your actions. Common scenarios leading to a facing environmental crime accusation range from a construction company in Plymouth burying demolition debris to a manufacturing plant in St. Paul failing to report a chemical spill. The consequences are severe, which is why a detailed defense is critical.

Minnesota Law on Environmental Crimes — Straight from the Statute

The legal foundation for the charges you face is Minnesota Statute § 609.671. This lengthy and detailed statute outlines the specific acts that are considered crimes, the definitions of key terms like “hazardous waste” and “knowing,” and the severe penalties that can be imposed. Understanding the precise language of the law is the first and most critical step in building a powerful defense against the government’s allegations.

Here is a look at some of the key prohibitive language from the statute:

609.671 ENVIRONMENT; CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

Subd. 3. Knowing endangerment. (a) A person is guilty of a felony if the person: (1) commits an act described in subdivision 4, 5, 8, paragraph (a), or 12; and (2) at the time of the violation knowingly places another person in imminent danger of death, great bodily harm, or substantial bodily harm.

Subd. 4. Hazardous waste; unlawful disposal or abandonment. A person who knowingly disposes of or abandons hazardous waste or arranges for the disposal of hazardous waste at a location other than one authorized by the Pollution Control Agency or the United States Environmental Protection Agency…is guilty of a felony…

Subd. 8. Water pollution. (a) A person is guilty of a felony who knowingly: (1) causes the violation of an effluent standard or limitation for a toxic pollutant in a…permit; (2) introduces into a sewer system…a hazardous substance that the person knew or reasonably should have known is likely to cause personal injury or property damage…

Subd. 12. Air pollution. (a) A person is guilty of a felony who knowingly: (1) causes a violation of a national emission standard for a hazardous air pollutant…

Breaking Down the Legal Elements of an Environmental Crime in Minnesota

To convict you or your company of an environmental crime, the prosecutor must prove several distinct elements beyond a reasonable doubt. These cases are not straightforward. They depend on scientific evidence, complex regulations, and, most importantly, your state of mind. My role is to dismantle the prosecution’s case, element by element, and expose the reasonable doubt that protects your freedom.

• The Prohibited Act: The state must first prove that you committed one of the specific acts outlined in the statute. This could be disposing of hazardous waste at an unpermitted site, treating or storing it without a proper permit, violating a water discharge limit, or releasing a hazardous air pollutant. The act must be clearly defined and supported by physical and scientific evidence. We will rigorously challenge the evidence, from the samples taken at the scene to the lab reports that classify the substances involved.
• The “Knowing” Element: This is the most critical and often most contestable element. The prosecutor must prove you acted “knowingly.” Under this statute, “knowing” doesn’t require proof that you knew you were breaking the law. It means your act was voluntary and not the result of a mistake or accident. For a corporate official, knowledge can be inferred from your position and supervisory responsibility—the “responsible corporate officer” doctrine. We will fight this by showing your actions were based on a reasonable mistake of fact, an accident beyond your control, or that you, as an official, exercised due diligence.
• Violation of a Rule or Permit: In many cases, the prosecution must show that your act violated a specific law, rule, or a material condition of a permit issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. This is not as simple as it sounds. Permits can be ambiguous, and regulations can be open to interpretation. We will conduct a deep dive into the specific permit conditions or rules you are accused of violating to determine if the government’s interpretation is correct and if the condition was truly “material.”
• Actual Endangerment (for the most serious charge): For a “knowing endangerment” felony charge, the state has the highest burden. They must prove that at the time of the violation, you knew you were placing another person in imminent danger of death or serious harm. This requires proving a direct link between your action and a specific, immediate threat to a real person. We will challenge the immediacy and the severity of the alleged danger, arguing that the risk was speculative, not imminent.

Penalties for an Environmental Crime Conviction in Minnesota Can Be Severe

Do not underestimate the severity of an environmental crime conviction. Prosecutors view these offenses as a threat to public health and the state’s natural resources, and the penalties reflect that. Whether charged as an individual or a corporation, the consequences can be financially crippling and, for an individual, can result in significant time behind bars. These are not just fines; they are life-altering criminal sentences.

Felony Penalties

Most environmental crimes in Minnesota are charged as felonies, carrying the possibility of prison time and massive fines.

• Knowing Endangerment: The most serious offense, this felony carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $100,000 for an individual. For a corporation, the fine can be up to $1,000,000.
• Illegal Disposal of Hazardous Waste: This felony is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a fine of up to $50,000.
• Water and Air Pollution Felonies: These convictions can result in sentences of up to 3 years in prison and fines that can reach $50,000 per day of violation.

Gross Misdemeanor and Misdemeanor Penalties

Even the lesser offenses carry stiff penalties.

• Negligent Violations: Committing an act like illegal disposal through gross negligence is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to 364 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $15,000.
• Lesser Air Pollution Violations: Some knowing violations of air permit conditions are misdemeanors, but they still carry fines of up to $10,000 per day of violation and up to 90 days in jail.

The “per day of violation” language in the Minnesota sentencing statutes for these crimes means that fines can accumulate to astronomical levels very quickly.

What Environmental Crime Looks Like in Real Life — Common Scenarios in Minnesota

Environmental charges can arise in a wide variety of business and industrial settings across Minnesota. They often begin with a surprise inspection, a disgruntled employee’s report, or an accidental discovery. Here are some common scenarios that can lead to criminal charges under § 609.671.

The Midnight Dumping in Rural Hennepin County

A small painting contractor based in Brooklyn Park has accumulated dozens of cans of old, lead-based paint and solvents. Knowing that proper disposal is expensive, the owner drives to a remote, wooded area in western Hennepin County late at night and dumps the cans. The act is discovered by a property owner, and an investigation traces the waste back to the contractor. This is a classic case of knowing disposal of hazardous waste, a felony.

The Permit Violation at a St. Paul Factory

A manufacturing facility in St. Paul has a state-issued permit to discharge treated wastewater into the sewer system. The permit has strict limits on the concentration of a certain toxic pollutant. To save money, the plant manager, a “responsible corporate official,” directs an employee to bypass a portion of the treatment system during night shifts. This causes the facility to exceed its permit limits. This knowing violation of a material permit condition is a felony.

The Falsified Records in Duluth

A mining operation near Duluth is required to monitor and report its air emissions. An environmental manager, under pressure to show compliance, alters the data from the monitoring equipment to make it appear that the facility is meeting its standards when it is not. This act of knowingly making a false material statement in a required report is a felony under the statute.

The Negligent Spill in Rochester

A transportation company in Rochester is hauling a tanker of industrial chemicals. Due to poorly maintained equipment, a valve fails and a significant amount of the chemical spills onto the road and into a storm drain that leads to the Zumbro River. The company’s failure to properly maintain its equipment could be seen as “gross negligence,” leading to a gross misdemeanor charge for the negligent release.

Legal Defenses That Might Work Against Your Environmental Crime Charge

When the government brings an environmental crimes case, it often comes with a mountain of technical data, lab reports, and regulatory paperwork designed to intimidate you. But these complex cases are often built on assumptions that can be challenged. A successful defense requires a deep dive into the science, the law, and the facts. As your attorney, I will leave no stone unturned in exposing the weaknesses in the prosecution’s case.

My approach is to bring in the right people—engineers, scientists, and environmental consultants—to challenge the government’s evidence head-on. We will conduct our own site visits and testing, scrutinize the government’s lab procedures for errors, and deconstruct the chain of custody of every sample. We will show the judge or jury that the state’s narrative is not the only one and that their evidence is not as solid as they claim. How to fight environmental crime charges in Minnesota often comes down to challenging the government’s science and proving a lack of criminal knowledge.

The “Safe Harbor” Statutory Defense

Minnesota law provides a powerful defense if you act responsibly. The statute explicitly states that you are not guilty of a negligent air or water quality violation if you: 1) notified the MPCA of the violation as soon as you discovered it, and 2) took prompt steps to fix the problem.

• Immediate Notification: We would gather all evidence proving you alerted the proper authorities as soon as you became aware of the issue. This includes phone logs, emails, and witness testimony showing you did not try to hide the problem. Prompt self-reporting is a key defense to environmental crimes in Minnesota.
• Prompt Remediation: We will document every step you took to contain the spill, stop the release, or otherwise remedy the violation. By demonstrating that you acted responsibly and took the situation seriously, we can argue that you fall squarely within this statutory defense, requiring a dismissal of the charges.

Lack of “Knowing” Intent

The government must prove you acted “knowingly.” This is a subjective element that we can fight by demonstrating that your actions were the result of a mistake, accident, or a misunderstanding of the complex regulations.

• Reasonable Mistake of Fact: Perhaps you reasonably believed the waste you disposed of was non-hazardous based on information provided by a supplier. Or maybe you believed you were taking waste to a fully permitted facility. If your belief was reasonable, even if mistaken, it can negate the “knowing” element.
• Accident Beyond Your Control: If the release was caused by an unforeseeable equipment failure, a so-called “act of God” like a flood, or the actions of a third-party saboteur, we can argue that your conduct was not voluntary and therefore not “knowing.”

The Substance Was Not Hazardous

The entire case often rests on whether the material involved meets the legal definition of “hazardous waste,” “toxic pollutant,” or “hazardous air pollutant.” These definitions are highly technical and specific.

• Challenging the Scientific Evidence: We can hire an independent chemist or environmental scientist to test the substances and testify that they do not meet the regulatory criteria for being hazardous.
• Attacking the Lab Procedures: We will meticulously review the government’s lab work. If they failed to follow proper protocols for collecting, preserving, or testing the samples, we can argue that the results are unreliable and inadmissible in court.

Your Conduct Was Permitted

The government may be misinterpreting your permit or the regulations. An environmental case can turn on the meaning of a single word in a thousand-page regulatory code.

• Ambiguity in the Permit: We will argue that the language in your permit was ambiguous and that your interpretation of your obligations was reasonable. If the permit is not clear, it is unfair for the government to hold you criminally liable.
• Actions Allowed by Law: We may be able to show that your actions, while perhaps frowned upon by the MPCA, were not actually prohibited by the letter of the law or your permit. The state cannot convict you for violating an unwritten rule.

Minnesota Environmental Crime FAQs — What You Need to Know Now

Will I go to jail for an environmental crime in Minnesota?

Jail or prison is a very real possibility, especially for any charge classified as a felony. Offenses like knowing endangerment or illegal disposal of hazardous waste carry presumptive prison sentences under state guidelines for individuals with a prior criminal history. However, as your attorney, my primary goal is to fight for a result that avoids incarceration, such as a dismissal, a reduction to a lesser charge, or a probationary sentence.

Can an environmental crime charge be dismissed?

Yes. Dismissal is the best possible outcome and one I always strive for. A case might be dismissed if the government’s evidence is weak, if they violated your rights during the investigation, or if we can successfully argue a legal defense like the “safe harbor” provision or lack of knowledge. The sooner you hire an attorney, the more opportunities we have to pursue a dismissal.

Do I need a lawyer for an environmental charge in Minneapolis?

Without question. These are among the most complex criminal cases in the Minnesota legal system. You will be facing a specialized prosecutor from the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office or even the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office. They are armed with a team of investigators and experts. You need a defense attorney who can meet them on a level playing field and knows how to counter their technical arguments.

How long does an environmental crime charge stay on my record in Minnesota?

A criminal conviction is permanent. A felony or gross misdemeanor on your record will appear on background checks for the rest of your life unless you can get it expunged. Expungement is a separate legal process that is not guaranteed and can be difficult to obtain. Avoiding the conviction in the first place is by far the better strategy.

What is the “responsible corporate officer” doctrine?

This doctrine allows a prosecutor to hold a corporate official criminally liable even if they didn’t personally commit the illegal act. If you had supervisory responsibility over the activity and had information that should have led you to discover the violation, you can be charged. It is a dangerous legal theory that we must fight aggressively.

My employee committed the violation, not me. Can I still be charged?

Yes. As a business owner or corporate officer, you can be held criminally liable for the acts of your employees if they were acting within the scope of their employment and you had supervisory authority. The law expects you to ensure your business complies with environmental regulations.

What if I didn’t know the substance was hazardous?

This can be a powerful defense. If you can show that you had a reasonable, good-faith belief that the material was non-hazardous, it can defeat the “knowing” element of the crime. We would need to gather evidence about why you held that belief, such as documentation from a supplier or standard industry practice.

What should I do if an MPCA inspector shows up at my business?

You should be polite and professional, but you should not answer substantive questions or consent to a search of areas where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy without a warrant. You should state that it is your policy to consult with legal counsel before any inspection and contact me immediately. Do not volunteer information or sign any documents.

Can both my company and I be charged?

Yes. It is very common in these cases for prosecutors to charge both the corporation and the individuals they believe were responsible, such as owners, plant managers, or environmental compliance officers. This puts maximum pressure on everyone involved.

What does “per day of violation” mean for fines?

It means that for an ongoing violation, a court can impose the maximum fine for each day the violation continued. A seemingly small leak that goes on for a month could result in 30 days of fines, potentially adding up to hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.

Is there a difference between a state and a federal environmental charge?

Yes. While the laws are often similar, the federal government can also bring charges under laws like the Clean Water Act or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These cases are prosecuted in federal court, which has different procedures and sentencing guidelines. I can represent you in either state or federal court.

I reported the spill. Can I still be charged?

Reporting a spill is the right thing to do and may provide you with the “safe harbor” defense against charges of negligent violations. However, it does not protect you from charges for “knowing” violations. Prosecutors might even try to use your report as an admission that you were aware of the problem.

The violation was an accident. Does that matter?

It matters immensely. The definition of a “knowing” act is one that is voluntary and not the result of an accident. If we can prove the violation was a true accident beyond your control, it is a complete defense to any charge that requires knowing conduct.

What is a “material term” of a permit?

A material term is a significant condition of your permit that relates to the prevention of environmental harm. A minor paperwork error might not be material, but a limit on the discharge of a toxic chemical almost certainly is. Whether a term is “material” can be a point of legal argument.

How can I protect my business during an investigation?

Hire legal counsel immediately. Do not destroy any documents. Institute a litigation hold to preserve all potentially relevant information. Direct all employee communications through your attorney to ensure a consistent and legally sound response. Taking control of the situation early is key.

What an Environmental Crime Conviction Could Mean for the Rest of Your Life

A conviction for an environmental crime, especially a felony, will have profound and lasting consequences that extend far beyond the courtroom. The criminal penalties are just the tip of the iceberg. You need to understand how a conviction will impact your business, your finances, and your personal freedom.

Criminal Record and Loss of Professional Licenses

A personal conviction will saddle you with a permanent criminal record, making future employment difficult. For your business, a conviction can lead to the loss of essential professional licenses and certifications needed to operate. It can destroy the reputation you have spent years building, causing customers and suppliers to abandon you. Life after an environmental crime conviction in Minnesota can be a constant struggle for legitimacy.

Debarment from Government Contracts

A conviction can lead to “debarment,” meaning your company will be barred from bidding on or receiving any local, state, or federal government contracts. For many businesses in Minnesota, especially in construction, engineering, and transportation, this is a financial death sentence. An entire revenue stream can be cut off permanently.

Inability to Secure Financing

Banks and lenders are extremely wary of doing business with a company or individual convicted of a felony environmental crime. You may find it nearly impossible to secure a loan, line of credit, or the financing necessary to run and grow your business. The conviction marks you as a high-risk investment, effectively choking off your company’s financial lifeline.

Potential Firearm Ban for Individuals

A felony conviction will result in a lifetime ban on your right to own or possess a firearm under both state and federal law. This is a significant loss of a constitutional right that comes as a surprise to many individuals facing these types of white-collar charges. This is one of the most severe personal collateral consequences of a conviction.

Why You Need a Tough, Experienced Minnesota Environmental Crime Attorney

When you are up against the vast resources of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Attorney General’s Office, you cannot afford to have anything less than a tenacious and knowledgeable defense attorney in your corner. This is not a battle you can win on your own. Your choice of lawyer is the single most important decision you will make.

The Advantage of a Dedicated Private Defender

Public defenders are stretched thin, handling hundreds of cases at once. They simply do not have the time, resources, or specialized knowledge required for a complex environmental crimes case. As your private attorney, I will immerse myself in your case. I will master the technical details, hire the necessary experts, and give you the personal attention you deserve. You will not be a number; you will be my client, and your defense will be my mission.

How Swift Action Can Define the Outcome

The government often spends months or even years building its case before you even know you are a target. Once you are notified of an investigation, the clock is ticking. By hiring me immediately, we can go on the offensive. I can intervene with investigators, manage communications with the MPCA, and begin building our defense before charges are even filed. Early action can prevent mistakes, preserve crucial evidence, and sometimes even persuade the government not to prosecute at all.

Navigating Minnesota’s Unique Legal System

An environmental case in Minnesota requires a deep understanding of state law, the MPCA’s internal procedures, and the local courts. I have defended clients in courtrooms across this state, from the metro hubs of Minneapolis and St. Paul to regional centers like Eagan and Plymouth. I know the players, I know the procedures, and I know how to build a case that resonates with Minnesota judges and juries. This local experience is an invaluable asset in your defense.

Building a Defense Designed to Win

My philosophy is simple: prepare every case for trial. This rigorous preparation sends a powerful message to the prosecutor: we are not afraid of a fight. We will challenge every piece of their evidence, file aggressive motions to suppress illegally obtained information, and demonstrate our readiness to take the case to a jury. This posture often leads to the best possible outcomes, whether it’s a full dismissal, a favorable plea to a lesser charge, or a not-guilty verdict at trial. Your future is on the line, and you need a defense built to win.