Charged Under § 609.5151? A Minnesota Doxxing Defense Lawyer Explains What You’re Up Against
You never intended for things to go this far. Maybe it started with a heated online debate, a protest, or a feeling that injustice needed to be exposed. You shared some information, believing you were exercising your right to speak out. Now, you’re staring at a criminal charge for Dissemination of Personal Information About Law Enforcement, also known as doxxing. The ground beneath your feet has vanished, replaced by the cold, unfamiliar territory of the Minnesota criminal justice system. The accusation itself feels designed to silence and intimidate you. Prosecutors and police will paint you as a dangerous vigilante, someone who recklessly endangers the lives of officers and their families. They will use the full weight of their authority to secure a conviction.
You feel isolated, misunderstood, and unsure of what happens next. The penalties are not trivial—they include jail time, steep fines, and a permanent criminal record that can follow you for the rest of your life. This is a moment where the decisions you make will have lasting consequences. But you are not powerless, and you do not have to navigate this labyrinth alone. I have stood beside people just like you, individuals from all corners of Minnesota—from the bustling streets of Minneapolis and St. Paul to the communities of Rochester, Duluth, and St. Cloud. I understand the complexities of these specific charges and how to build a defense against them. Your story, your intent, and your rights matter. Let’s make sure they are heard.
The Line Between Free Speech and a Criminal Charge in Minnesota
In the digital age, sharing information is second nature. But when that information concerns a law enforcement official, Minnesota law draws a sharp and serious line. A charge for Dissemination of Personal Information About Law Enforcement isn’t about simply stating an officer’s name. It’s about the act of “doxxing”—publishing private, personal details with the intent to threaten, harass, or intimidate, or with the knowledge that doing so creates a severe risk. This is where many people find themselves unfairly charged. You may have shared information you found publicly, or you may have had no idea that your actions could be interpreted as creating a threat.
The prosecution must prove more than just the fact that you posted something online. They have to prove your state of mind and the direct result of your actions. Did you knowingly release private data? Should you have reasonably known that it would create an “imminent and serious threat”? These are not simple questions, and they are the battleground where your case will be won or lost. Accusations of this nature often arise from emotionally charged situations, such as protests in Minneapolis, online arguments in suburban Hennepin or Ramsey County, or community disputes in cities like Bloomington or Plymouth. The context of your actions is critical, and my job is to ensure that context is not ignored.
Minnesota Law on Doxxing Law Enforcement — Straight from the Statute
The entire case against you is built on a specific state law. It’s important you understand the exact language the prosecutor will use. The charge comes directly from Minnesota Statutes § 609.5151.
Here is the precise text of the law:
609.5151 DISSEMINATION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT PROHIBITED; PENALTY.
Subdivision 1. Definitions. As used in this section:
(1) “family or household member” has the meaning given in section 518B.01, subdivision 2;
(2) “law enforcement official” means both peace officers as defined in section 626.84, subdivision 1, and persons employed by a law enforcement agency; and
(3) “personal information” means a home telephone number, personal cell number, personal email address, name of the official’s minor child, photographs of the official’s minor child, home address, directions to a home, or photographs of a home.
Subd. 2. Crime described. (a) It is a misdemeanor for a person to knowingly and without consent make publicly available, including but not limited to through the Internet, personal information about a law enforcement official or an official’s family or household member, if:
(1) the public availability of information poses an imminent and serious threat to the official’s safety or the safety of an official’s family or household member; and
(2) the person making the information publicly available knows or reasonably should know of the imminent and serious threat.
(b) A person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor if the person violates paragraph (a) and a law enforcement official or an official’s family or household member suffers great bodily harm or death as a result of the violation.
(c) A person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
Breaking Down the Legal Elements of a Doxxing Charge in Minnesota
To convict you, the prosecutor can’t just tell a story. They must prove every single component—or “element”—of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If they fail to prove even one of these elements, the case against you falls apart. My entire defensive strategy is built around systematically dismantling the state’s ability to prove each of these points. Understanding them is the first step toward building your defense.
- Knowingly and Without ConsentThis element requires the state to prove two things: that you acted with knowledge and that you did so without the officer’s permission. “Knowingly” means you were aware you were making personal information public. It’s not enough for it to be an accident, a mistake, or an incidental part of a larger post. Furthermore, the statute specifies the act must be “without consent.” While it’s highly unlikely an officer would consent to this, it remains a technical element the prosecution must address. This is a crucial point of attack in your defense.
- Making Personal Information Publicly AvailableThe state must show that you are the one who actively made the information public. “Personal information” is very narrowly defined: home addresses, personal phone numbers or emails, and photos of a home or minor children. It does not include a name, rank, or precinct. If the information was already easily accessible through public records or was posted by someone else and you simply shared it, we can argue you didn’t “make” it available in the way the statute intends. The act of dissemination, often via the internet, is central to this charge.
- Poses an Imminent and Serious ThreatThis is perhaps the most critical and subjective element. The prosecution must prove that the publication of the information created an imminent (meaning immediate) and serious threat to the safety of the officer or their family. Vague, future, or hypothetical threats are not enough. This is a very high standard for the government to meet. We will challenge the state to provide concrete evidence that a direct and immediate danger was created by your specific action, not just a general sense of unease or anger from the public.
- You Knew or Should Have Known of the ThreatFinally, the prosecutor has to prove your state of mind. It’s not enough that a threat existed; they must prove that you either knew about the imminent and serious threat or that a reasonable person in your shoes should have known about it. This element is designed to separate someone with malicious intent from someone who acted carelessly or naively. Your intent, the context of the post, and the direct language you used will be heavily scrutinized. I will work to show that you had no such knowledge and could not have reasonably foreseen such a specific, severe outcome.
The High Cost of a Conviction: Jail, Fines, and Your Future
A conviction under Minnesota Statutes § 609.5151 is not something to take lightly. The state has created specific penalties designed to punish and deter this conduct, and a judge will not hesitate to impose them. Understanding the potential consequences is essential as you decide how to approach your defense. The penalties for doxxing law enforcement in Minnesota can be severe and escalate based on the circumstances and outcome.
Misdemeanor Penalties
For a first offense where no one is physically harmed, the crime is classified as a misdemeanor. While this is the lowest level of criminal offense, the penalties are still significant. If convicted, you face:
- Up to 90 days in jail.
- A fine of up to $1,000.
- A permanent criminal record that can impact your future employment and housing opportunities.
Gross Misdemeanor Penalties
The charge becomes a gross misdemeanor, a more serious offense, under two conditions:
- It is your second or subsequent offense under this statute.
- An officer or their family member suffers “great bodily harm” or dies as a result of the information you shared.
The penalties for a gross misdemeanor conviction are substantially higher:
- Up to 364 days in jail.
- A fine of up to $3,000.
These penalties for doxxing in Minnesota are just the beginning. The long-term consequences of having a conviction on your record can be even more damaging.
How a Post Becomes a Prosecution: Real Minnesota Scenarios
This charge can arise from many different situations, often escalating from online activity to a real-world criminal investigation. Here are some common scenarios where people in Minnesota find themselves facing charges under § 609.5151.
The Angry Social Media Post in Minneapolis
After a controversial police interaction in downtown Minneapolis, a protest group’s social media page posts a photo of an officer’s suburban home, obtained from public property records, with the caption, “This is where Officer X lives. Let him know how you feel.” Even if the intent was to encourage peaceful protest, a prosecutor could argue this action created an imminent and serious threat by directing public anger to a private residence, leading to charges.
The Online Forum Argument in Rochester
During a heated debate in a Rochester-area online community forum about local law enforcement policies, one user gets frustrated and posts what they claim is the personal cell phone number of the police chief. They add, “If you want real answers, call him yourself.” The police department is alerted, and investigators could argue that publishing the private number constitutes making personal information public and that the user should have known it would lead to harassing calls, thus posing a threat.
The Activist Website in St. Paul
Following a series of articles about alleged police misconduct, an activist group based in St. Paul creates a webpage dedicated to “officer accountability.” The page lists the names, badge numbers, and home addresses of several officers involved. Even if the information was gathered from various online sources, compiling it and publishing it in one place could be seen as the act of “making it publicly available” in a context that a prosecutor could frame as threatening.
The Misguided Warning in Duluth
In a neighborhood Facebook group in Duluth, a resident warns others about a plainclothes officer they believe is unfairly targeting people in their area. To “prove” it, they post the officer’s name and a picture of their personal vehicle parked in their driveway. While the poster’s intent might have been to inform neighbors, the state could charge them by claiming that publishing the photo of the home and vehicle created a serious risk to the officer’s safety.
Fighting Back: Strategies to Challenge Your Doxxing Charge
An accusation is not a conviction. The burden is entirely on the state to prove its case against you, and they often face significant hurdles in doxxing cases. The law has very specific requirements, and an aggressive defense strategy focuses on exploiting the weaknesses in the prosecution’s argument. I will meticulously review every piece of evidence—the social media posts, the police reports, the witness statements—to find the cracks in their case.
Your defense must be tailored to the unique facts of your situation. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. However, several powerful legal defenses can be used to challenge these charges. The government’s case is often built on assumptions about your intent and the impact of your words. My job is to replace those assumptions with reasonable doubt by presenting a clear, compelling counter-narrative that protects your rights and your freedom.
Defense: The Information Was Not a “True Threat”
Your First Amendment right to free speech is a cornerstone of our legal system, but it doesn’t protect “true threats.” My goal is to demonstrate that your actions, while perhaps ill-advised, did not rise to this high legal standard.
- Lack of Immediacy: The statute requires an imminent threat. We will argue that the information shared did not create an immediate danger. For example, we can show that the post was vague, did not call for violence, and that no actual harm occurred in the immediate aftermath, suggesting the “threat” is something the prosecution is inventing after the fact.
- Protected Political Speech: If your post was part of a broader political critique of police conduct, we can argue it constitutes protected speech. The law is not meant to silence dissent or punish individuals for participating in public discourse about the actions of government officials, even if that speech is harsh or uncomfortable for the subject.
Defense: The State Cannot Prove Your Intent
The prosecutor must get inside your head and prove what you knew or should have known. This is an incredibly difficult task for them, and it is a key area for us to attack.
- You Didn’t Act “Knowingly”: We can argue that you were unaware of the specific nature of the information. For example, perhaps you shared a link without realizing it contained an officer’s personal address or phone number. If you did not knowingly publish the prohibited information, you cannot be guilty of the crime.
- You Couldn’t Foresee a Threat: The state has to show you knew or should have known that your post would create an imminent and serious threat. We can argue that a reasonable person in your situation would not have foreseen such an extreme outcome. We will highlight the context of your post to show that your intent was not to cause harm but to inform, protest, or express an opinion.
Defense: The Information Was Already Public
The law punishes the act of making private information publicly available. If the information was already out there for the world to see, your role in its spread may not meet the legal definition of the crime.
- Publicly Available Records: If the address, phone number, or other information you shared is easily accessible through public records databases, online search engines, or other websites, we can argue that you did not “make” it public. You simply pointed to information that was already available, which is a fundamentally different act.
- Third-Party Information: If you merely shared, reposted, or retweeted information that someone else had already posted, we can build a defense that you are not the original disseminator. The law is aimed at the person who first exposes the private information, not necessarily everyone who comments on or shares it afterward.
Defense: Challenging the “Personal Information” Element
The statute has a very specific and limited definition of “personal information.” If what you shared doesn’t fall squarely into one of these categories, the charge must be dismissed.
- Information Outside the Definition: The law protects things like home addresses, personal phone numbers, and photos of a home or minor child. It does not protect an officer’s name, rank, place of work, work email, or other general information. We will scrutinize exactly what was shared. If it doesn’t fit the statute’s narrow definition, the state has no case.
Minnesota Doxxing FAQs — What You Need to Know Now
Will I definitely go to jail for a doxxing charge in Minnesota?
Not necessarily. While jail time is a possible penalty, especially for a gross misdemeanor, it is not automatic. For a first-time misdemeanor offense, a skilled attorney can often argue for alternatives like probation, community service, or a fine instead of incarceration. The outcome depends heavily on the specifics of your case, your criminal history, and the strength of your defense.
Can a charge for disseminating law enforcement information be dismissed?
Yes. A dismissal is one of the best possible outcomes, and it is my primary goal in every case I handle. A case can be dismissed if we can show the prosecutor that they cannot prove all the elements of the crime, if critical evidence was obtained illegally, or if we successfully argue that your actions are protected by the First Amendment.
Do I need a lawyer for a doxxing charge in Minneapolis or St. Paul?
Absolutely. This is not a simple charge you should ever face alone. The law is new and complex, and prosecutors in urban areas like Hennepin and Ramsey counties are often pressured to take a hard line. You need a lawyer who understands the nuances of Minnesota Statutes § 609.5151 and knows how to challenge the state’s case in local courts.
How long does a doxxing charge stay on my record in Minnesota?
A conviction for this crime will stay on your criminal record permanently unless it is expunged. A criminal record can be a significant barrier to future opportunities. Securing a dismissal, an acquittal at trial, or another favorable outcome that avoids a conviction is the best way to protect your record from the start.
What is the difference between a misdemeanor and a gross misdemeanor for this crime?
A standard first offense is a misdemeanor. It becomes a gross misdemeanor if it’s your second offense OR if an officer or their family member suffers great bodily harm or dies as a result of your actions. A gross misdemeanor carries much harsher penalties, including up to a year in jail.
What if I just shared a link someone else posted?
This can be a strong defense. The law targets the person who “makes” the information public. If you simply shared content that was already publicly available, we can argue that you are not the person who committed the primary criminal act. The context and your commentary when sharing will be important factors.
Does my right to free speech protect me?
It might. The First Amendment provides broad protection for speech, especially political speech criticizing government actions. However, this right is not absolute and does not protect “true threats.” A key part of your defense will be arguing that your speech did not cross that line and falls under constitutional protection.
What counts as “imminent and serious threat”?
This is a high legal standard. “Imminent” means it’s about to happen right now, not at some point in the future. “Serious” means it involves a significant risk of harm. A prosecutor can’t just say that the officer felt unsafe; they must present evidence of a genuine, immediate danger caused by your specific post.
What if I didn’t know the person was a law enforcement official?
While many cases involve known officers, if you genuinely did not know the person whose information you shared was a law enforcement official, that could be part of your defense. The state must prove you acted knowingly, and your lack of knowledge about the person’s profession could undermine their case.
Can a prosecutor use my other social media posts against me?
Yes. The prosecution will search through your social media history looking for anything that suggests you have animosity toward the police or an intent to cause harm. It is critical that you stop posting about your case immediately and set your profiles to private.
What should I do if the police want to question me?
You have the right to remain silent. You should politely decline to answer any questions and state clearly, “I am exercising my right to remain silent, and I want to speak with my lawyer.” Do not try to explain yourself or talk your way out of it. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
How much does it cost to hire a lawyer for a case like this?
The cost will vary depending on the complexity of your case. However, investing in a dedicated, private criminal defense attorney is an investment in your future. It is the single most important step you can take to protect yourself from the severe and lifelong consequences of a conviction. I offer clear, straightforward fee structures.
What if the information I posted was true?
The truth of the information is not a defense. The law doesn’t punish you for lying; it punishes you for disseminating certain kinds of true personal information (like a home address) under circumstances that create a severe threat.
I live in a smaller city like Maple Grove or Eagan. Is this charge still serious?
Yes. These charges are taken seriously by prosecutors in every county in Minnesota, from Washington to Stearns County. A conviction in a suburban or rural court carries the same penalties and the same permanent criminal record as one in Minneapolis.
Is it too late to hire a lawyer if I’ve already been charged?
No, it is never too late to secure legal representation. The sooner you hire an attorney, the more time I have to build your defense, negotiate with the prosecutor, and protect your rights. Whether you were just arrested or have an upcoming court date, call me immediately.
Beyond the Courtroom: The Lingering Shadow of a Criminal Record
The consequences of a conviction for doxxing a law enforcement officer extend far beyond jail time and fines. A criminal record creates a ripple effect, touching nearly every aspect of your life long after you have served your sentence. These “collateral consequences” can feel like a punishment that never ends, limiting your freedom and opportunities for years to come. Understanding these risks is crucial, as avoiding them is a primary reason to fight your charges so aggressively.
Your Second Amendment Rights at Risk
A conviction for a gross misdemeanor-level offense in Minnesota will result in a lifetime ban on your right to own or possess a firearm. This is not a temporary restriction; it is a permanent loss of a constitutional right. For many Minnesotans who hunt, participate in shooting sports, or simply wish to have a firearm for personal protection, this consequence alone is devastating. We must fight to prevent a conviction that would strip you of this fundamental right forever.
The Impact on Your Career and Education
Imagine having to check the “yes” box on a job application asking if you’ve ever been convicted of a crime. A conviction for a charge like this—one that implies a threat against law enforcement—can be a major red flag for employers. You may be automatically disqualified from jobs in government, education, healthcare, or any field requiring a security clearance or position of trust. Similarly, it can hinder your ability to get accepted into college or receive financial aid.
Loss of Housing and Professional Licenses
Landlords routinely run background checks on prospective tenants. A criminal record, especially for a crime that sounds threatening, can make it incredibly difficult to find safe, affordable housing. Landlords may see you as a liability and deny your application. Furthermore, if you hold a professional license (such as a nurse, teacher, or real estate agent), a conviction could trigger a review by your licensing board, potentially leading to suspension or revocation of the license you worked so hard to earn.
Severe Immigration Consequences
For non-U.S. citizens, the stakes are even higher. A conviction for a crime like this could be considered a “crime involving moral turpitude” (CIMT) or an aggravated felony under complex immigration laws. This could make you deportable, even if you are here legally with a green card. It can also prevent you from ever becoming a U.S. citizen or re-entering the country if you leave. Your immigration status could be in serious jeopardy.
You Don’t Have to Fight Alone: Why My Approach Makes a Difference
When you are facing the full power of the government, you need more than just a lawyer. You need a dedicated advocate who is fully invested in your case and prepared to fight for you at every turn. The criminal justice system is an intimidating and often unfair arena. Having a seasoned criminal defense attorney in your corner is not a luxury—it is a necessity. It levels the playing field and gives you the best possible chance at protecting your future.
The Advantage of a Dedicated Private Attorney
Unlike a public defender who may be juggling hundreds of cases, when you hire me, your case becomes my priority. I have the time, resources, and focus to dedicate to a thorough investigation and a meticulously crafted defense. I will personally handle every aspect of your case, from the initial consultation to the final resolution. You won’t be passed off to a junior associate or paralegal. You will have a direct line to me, ensuring you are always informed and that your questions are always answered. This personal commitment is the foundation of a strong attorney-client relationship and a successful defense.
How Acting Fast Can Change Everything
The most critical moments in a criminal case often happen in the first few days after an arrest or charge. By retaining me immediately, I can get to work before the prosecution has fully built its case. I can contact the prosecutor to present our side of the story, highlight weaknesses in their evidence, and potentially convince them to drop the charges before they gain momentum. Early intervention can also help preserve crucial evidence, locate witnesses, and prevent you from making any statements that could damage your case. The sooner you call, the more options we have.
Navigating Minnesota’s Local Courts
Every courthouse in Minnesota, from the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis to the St. Louis County Courthouse in Duluth, has its own set of unwritten rules, procedures, and personalities. I have represented clients across the state and understand these local nuances. I know the prosecutors and the judges. This experience allows me to tailor our legal strategy to the specific court where your case is being heard, giving you a critical advantage over an attorney who is unfamiliar with the local landscape.
Building a Defense That Gets Results
My approach is proactive and aggressive. I don’t wait for the prosecution to make a move. I start by conducting my own investigation, challenging the legality of the police’s actions, and filing motions to suppress illegally obtained evidence. Whether the best path forward is negotiating for a dismissal, securing a favorable plea agreement, or taking your case to a jury trial, I prepare for every possibility. My goal is simple: to achieve the best possible outcome for you, protect your record, and allow you to move on with your life. This is your future on the line, and I will fight to defend it.