A Minnesota Defense Attorney Explains Your Rights and Defenses Under Minn. Stat. § 609.7495
You were standing up for what you believe in. You were exercising your constitutional right to speak, to protest, and to have your voice heard on a deeply divisive issue. You were on a public sidewalk, perhaps holding a sign, chanting, or handing out literature. Now, you’re holding a criminal citation, and you’re being accused of a crime: Physical Interference with Safe Access to Health Care. You didn’t plan to end up here. You see yourself as a passionate advocate, not a criminal. The line between lawful protest and illegal obstruction can be dangerously thin, and it’s a line that police and prosecutors often draw based on political pressure or their own personal views.
You must understand this: a charge under this statute is not a simple ticket or a minor infraction. It is a gross misdemeanor, a serious crime in Minnesota that carries the potential for jail time, significant fines, and a permanent criminal record. Furthermore, it opens the door for you to be sued in civil court for monetary damages. As a criminal defense attorney who has defended the rights of citizens across Minnesota—from the politically charged streets of Minneapolis and St. Paul to the community sidewalks of Rochester, Duluth, and St. Cloud—I know that these cases are about more than just the facts. They are about protecting your First Amendment rights against government overreach. You do not have to face this fight alone.
The Line in the Sand: What This Charge Actually Means in Minnesota
The most important thing for you to understand is that this law is not intended to punish you for the content of your speech. It is not illegal to hold a sign that offends people or to voice an opinion that is unpopular. The entire case against you hinges on a single concept: physical obstruction. To be convicted of this crime, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you intentionally and physically blocked an individual’s ability to enter or leave a healthcare facility. This is a critical distinction. Simply being present, standing near a door, or even causing someone to feel uncomfortable is not a crime under this statute.
A charge for physical interference in Minnesota requires evidence that you created an actual physical barrier with your body or an object you were controlling. It alleges that you moved beyond protected speech and took an action that made it physically impossible or unreasonably difficult for someone to pass. This is a high standard for the state to meet, and it is where a strong defense begins. If you did not intend to block anyone, or if your actions did not create a true physical barrier, the state’s case against you can and should fall apart. Facing a Minnesota healthcare access charge means you are fighting an accusation about your physical actions, not your beliefs.
Minnesota’s Health Care Access Law — Straight from the Statute
The legal authority for the charge you are facing is found in Minnesota Statutes § 609.7495. It is crucial that you read the exact language of the law, as it contains the very definitions and exceptions that will form the basis of your defense. Pay close attention not only to what is prohibited, but also to what is explicitly protected. The statute itself carves out a safe harbor for peaceful, lawful protest.
Here is the precise text of the law:
609.7495 PHYSICAL INTERFERENCE WITH SAFE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE.
Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them.
(a) “Facility” means any of the following: [a long list including hospitals, clinics, counseling centers, shelters, etc.]
(b) “Aggrieved party” means a person whose access to or egress from a facility is obstructed in violation of subdivision 2, or the facility.
Subd. 2. Obstructing access prohibited. A person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor who intentionally and physically obstructs any individual’s access to or egress from a facility.
Subd. 3. Not applicable. Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the right of any individual or group to engage in speech protected by the United States Constitution, the Minnesota Constitution, or federal or state law, including but not limited to peaceful and lawful handbilling and picketing.
Subd. 4. Civil remedies. (a) A party who is aggrieved by an act prohibited by this section…may bring an action for damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, as appropriate, in district court…
(b) A party who prevails in a civil action under this subdivision is entitled to recover from the violator damages, costs, attorney fees, and other relief as determined by the court. In addition to all other damages, the court may award to the aggrieved party a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation.
Breaking Down the Legal Elements of the Charge
For the state to convict you of this gross misdemeanor, the prosecutor must prove three distinct elements beyond a reasonable doubt. They can’t just point to an emotional video or a witness who was upset by your protest. They must build a case with hard evidence for each component of the crime. If their proof on any one of these elements is weak, their entire case fails. This is where we will focus our attack.
- An Intentional Act: The prosecutor must first prove that you acted intentionally. This means it was your conscious purpose to physically obstruct someone, or that you acted knowing that your actions were practically certain to cause a physical obstruction. If you accidentally got in someone’s way because the crowd shifted, or if you were pushed, you have not acted intentionally. This is a high standard that requires the state to prove what was in your mind.
- A Physical Obstruction: This is the core of the offense and the most critical element to challenge. The state must prove you created a genuine physical barrier. This means making passage unreasonably difficult or impossible. Simply standing near someone, speaking to them, or holding a sign in their vicinity is not physical obstruction. Your body, or an object like a large sign or a barricade, must have actually blocked a person’s path of travel.
- Access to a Healthcare Facility: The physical obstruction must have interfered with an individual’s ability to get into or out of a “facility.” The law defines “facility” very broadly to include hospitals, clinics, counseling centers, addiction recovery centers, and even domestic abuse shelters. While the location is usually not in dispute, the prosecution must still prove that the person you allegedly blocked was trying to access or leave one of these specific places.
The Consequences of a Conviction: More Than Just a Protest Charge
Do not underestimate what you are up against. The state of Minnesota has made a clear choice to treat this offense not as a simple misdemeanor, but as a serious gross misdemeanor. This elevates the potential penalties significantly and creates a permanent mark on your record. Worse yet, the statute explicitly gives the alleged victim the power to sue you for money, meaning you could be fighting a costly legal battle on two fronts at the same time.
Criminal Penalties: A Gross Misdemeanor
A conviction for Physical Interference with Safe Access to Health Care is a gross misdemeanor, which carries severe penalties in Minnesota:
- Up to 364 days in jail;
- A fine of up to $3,000; or
- Both jail time and a fine.
In addition, a judge can place you on probation for up to two years, with conditions that could restrict your right to protest or be near certain locations. This conviction will remain on your criminal record for the rest of your life.
Civil Penalties: Fighting a Lawsuit on Top of Criminal Charges
This is a danger many people charged with this crime overlook. Subdivision 4 of the law allows the “aggrieved party”—the person you allegedly blocked or the facility itself—to sue you in civil court. If they win, you could be ordered to pay:
- Their actual damages;
- Their attorney’s fees and court costs;
- A civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation.
This means that on top of facing jail time and criminal fines, you could be hit with a devastating civil judgment that could lead to financial ruin.
Where Free Speech Meets a Criminal Charge: Common Scenarios in Minnesota
These charges almost always arise from tense, chaotic, and emotionally charged situations where the line between protected speech and criminal conduct becomes blurred. Police, often under pressure to “control the situation,” may make arrests based on a misunderstanding of the law or a biased view of the protest. You may recognize your own circumstances in these common scenarios.
The Clinic Protest in Minneapolis
You are part of a protest on a public sidewalk outside a health clinic in Minneapolis. As a patient approaches the entrance, the crowd of protestors tightens, and several people attempt to speak with her and hand her leaflets. The patient feels crowded and has to push through the group to get to the door. Police, viewing video footage later, charge you and others with physical obstruction, claiming your group collectively formed a physical barrier.
The Hospital Demonstration in Rochester
During a demonstration concerning hospital policy at a major medical center in Rochester, a group of activists links arms across a driveway leading to an administrative building. While you were part of the protest, you were not part of the human chain. However, because you were present and chanting, police mistakenly identify you as one of the individuals who intentionally blocked the driveway and charge you with the crime.
The Counseling Center Picket in St. Paul
You are engaged in a solitary protest outside a counseling center in St. Paul. You are standing on the public sidewalk near the entrance, holding a sign. When people enter or exit, you attempt to speak to them. One person becomes angry at your message and calls the police, falsely claiming that you stood directly in front of them and refused to move, thereby physically blocking their path.
The Misunderstood Encounter in Duluth
You are peacefully picketing outside a facility in Duluth. You see a person walking towards the entrance and you approach them to offer them a pamphlet. In the process of this exchange, you momentarily stand in their path. The person, who is hostile to your message, tells police you intentionally put your body in their way to stop them from entering. You are charged based on their subjective and biased interpretation of the event.
Your Constitutional Rights Are Your Shield: Defenses to This Charge
When you are charged with a crime that directly implicates your First Amendment rights, your defense must be aggressive, principled, and unwavering. The statute itself acknowledges that it cannot be used to punish protected speech, and we will force the state to honor that limitation. Your actions were those of a citizen engaging in public discourse, not a criminal trying to create a physical barricade. My entire defensive strategy will be built on this foundation.
We will not let the prosecution mischaracterize your advocacy as obstruction. We will meticulously examine the evidence—especially any video footage—to show what really happened. We will challenge the credibility of the complaining witness and expose their potential bias against your message. This is more than a criminal case; it is a defense of your fundamental right to speak freely in the public square.
It Wasn’t Physical Obstruction
This is the central pillar of your defense. The state must prove you created a real, physical barrier. We will argue that your conduct, while perhaps disliked by the complainant, never rose to the level of criminal obstruction.
- Peaceful Picketing: The law explicitly protects peaceful picketing. We will show that you were simply walking on a public sidewalk, holding a sign, or chanting. This conduct is constitutionally protected and cannot be the basis for a conviction under this statute.
- No Actual Barrier: We will use video evidence and witness testimony to show that there was always a clear path for the individual to enter or leave the facility. If they could have easily walked around you, then you did not “physically obstruct” them in the way the law requires.
You Did Not Act Intentionally
The prosecutor must prove your specific intent. It is not enough to show that an obstruction occurred; they must prove you meant for it to happen.
- Accidental Contact: In a crowded or chaotic protest environment, accidental contact is inevitable. We can argue that any alleged obstruction was the result of the crowd’s movement, or that you were inadvertently pushed into someone’s path. An accident is not a crime.
- Intent to Communicate, Not Obstruct: We will argue that your intent was never to create a physical barrier, but to communicate a message or hand someone a leaflet. While the person may not have liked your message, your intent was persuasion, not physical obstruction.
This is Protected First Amendment Activity
This defense puts the government’s own law on trial. Subdivision 3 of the statute is your shield, and we will use it to protect you.
- The “Safe Harbor” Provision: We will argue that your conduct falls squarely within the protected activities listed in the statute itself: “peaceful and lawful handbilling and picketing.” We will argue that the police arrested you for conduct that the legislature specifically intended to protect.
- Vague and Overbroad Application: We can challenge the law as it was applied to you, arguing that police and prosecutors used a vague definition of “obstruction” to unconstitutionally shut down your protected speech because they disagreed with its content.
Challenging the Complainant’s Credibility
Often, these charges are based entirely on the word of one person—an “aggrieved party” who was likely angered by the message of your protest.
- Bias and Hostility: We will cross-examine the complaining witness to expose their hostility toward you and your message. We can show that their claim of “obstruction” is an exaggeration or fabrication motivated by their disagreement with your political or religious views.
- Inconsistent Statements: We will compare the witness’s testimony in court to their initial statement to the police. Any inconsistencies or contradictions can be used to destroy their credibility and create reasonable doubt in the mind of the judge or jury.
Minnesota Health Care Access Law FAQs — Your Questions Answered
Will I go to jail if convicted of this crime?
As a gross misdemeanor, this offense carries a maximum penalty of 364 days in jail. While a first-time offense may not result in the maximum sentence, jail time is a very real possibility, especially if a judge views your actions as particularly disruptive. The only way to guarantee you avoid jail is to win your case.
Can I be charged for just holding a sign on the sidewalk?
No. Simply holding a sign, no matter how controversial its message, is a constitutionally protected activity. To be charged with this crime, the state must allege that you used your body or the sign itself to create an actual physical barrier that blocked someone’s path.
What is the difference between this crime and trespassing?
Trespassing involves being on private property after being told to leave. This crime, Physical Interference with Safe Access, typically occurs on public property, like a sidewalk outside a facility. It punishes the act of obstruction, not your mere presence.
Do I need a lawyer for a gross misdemeanor in a city like Bloomington or Plymouth?
Absolutely. A gross misdemeanor is a serious crime that will follow you for life. You are facing potential jail time, a substantial fine, a civil lawsuit, and a permanent criminal record. You need an experienced defense attorney to protect your rights, especially when those rights involve the First Amendment.
What if the person could have used a different door to get in?
This is an excellent point for your defense. If there were other, easily accessible entrances available, it undermines the claim that you “physically obstructed” their access to the facility itself. We can argue that at most you blocked one of many paths, not access to the facility as a whole.
Can they really sue me for money on top of the criminal charge?
Yes. The law explicitly gives the “aggrieved party” the right to file a separate civil lawsuit against you. They can sue for damages, attorney’s fees, and civil penalties. This dual threat makes it even more critical to mount a powerful defense against the criminal charge.
What does “intentionally” mean in this context?
“Intentionally” means it was your conscious objective to physically block someone, or you knew that your actions were practically certain to result in a physical obstruction. It is a much higher standard than acting recklessly or negligently (carelessly). The prosecutor must prove your specific state of mind.
Is video evidence important in these cases?
Video evidence is absolutely critical. Surveillance footage from the facility or cell phone video from bystanders can often prove that no physical obstruction actually occurred, directly contradicting the complaining witness’s claims. It is often the most powerful tool in your defense.
What if the police told me to move and I didn’t?
This can complicate your case, as it could lead to other charges like Failure to Obey a Lawful Order. However, it does not automatically mean you are guilty of physical obstruction. If you were engaged in lawful, peaceful picketing, a police order to disperse may have been unlawful itself.
My protest was completely peaceful. How can I be charged with a crime?
This is the central issue in most of these cases. The state will claim that even though you were “peaceful,” your actions crossed the line into creating a physical barrier. Your defense will be that your peaceful protest is protected by the First Amendment and the statute itself, and that you never crossed that line.
Will this charge affect my right to own a gun?
A gross misdemeanor conviction in Minnesota does not automatically result in the loss of firearm rights under state law, unlike a felony. However, it is a serious conviction that could be viewed negatively in other contexts, and fighting to keep your record clean is the best way to protect all of your rights.
Can I get this charge dismissed?
Yes. These cases are often ripe for dismissal, especially when there is strong video evidence or when the state’s case relies solely on a biased witness. A skilled attorney can file pretrial motions to have the case thrown out on legal or constitutional grounds.
What if I was just part of a large group?
Being part of a group is not a defense in itself. The state can charge individuals under a theory of “accomplice liability.” However, to convict you, they must still prove that you personally acted with the intent to aid in the physical obstruction. Your defense would focus on your individual actions and intent, separate from the group’s.
What is the first step I should take after being charged?
Exercise your right to remain silent and contact a criminal defense attorney immediately. Do not discuss the protest or the incident on social media or with anyone else. The most important thing you can do right now is get a legal advocate in your corner.
I can’t afford a lawyer. What should I do?
You cannot afford not to have a lawyer for a gross misdemeanor charge. A conviction will cost you far more in the long run. I offer clear fee structures and payment plans, and we can discuss your options during a consultation. Your freedom and your future are worth the investment.
The Ripple Effect: What a Conviction Could Mean for Your Life
A conviction for Physical Interference with Safe Access to Health Care can cast a long shadow over your life, creating obstacles long after you have paid your fine or completed probation. This is not a charge to be taken lightly. It is a public record that can be interpreted in the most negative ways by people who hold power over your future.
A Damaging and Misleading Criminal Record
A gross misdemeanor conviction is a permanent part of your public record. When potential employers see this conviction, they won’t see “passionate activist.” They may see “aggressive,” “disruptive,” or “someone who interferes with business operations.” It can be a significant barrier to employment, especially for jobs that require public interaction or a calm demeanor.
The Threat of Financial Ruin from Civil Lawsuits
The civil remedies portion of this statute is a serious threat. Even if you avoid jail time in the criminal case, you could be hit with a civil judgment that forces you to pay thousands of dollars in damages and attorney’s fees to the person or facility that sued you. This can create a significant financial hardship that follows you for years.
Chilling Your Right to Future Activism
A conviction will likely come with a period of probation. The terms of that probation could include a prohibition on participating in protests or demonstrations, or orders to stay away from certain locations. A conviction can effectively silence your voice and strip you of your ability to engage in the very activism you believe in, under threat of being sent to jail for a probation violation.
Potential Immigration Consequences
For any non-U.S. citizen, a criminal conviction can create serious complications. While a single gross misdemeanor may not automatically lead to deportation, it can be a significant negative factor in any application for a green card, visa renewal, or naturalization. It creates a record of “bad moral character” that can be used against you by immigration authorities.
Why You Need a Defense Attorney Who Understands Both Criminal Law and Constitutional Rights
When the state charges you for actions taken during a protest, you are facing more than just a criminal accusation—you are facing a challenge to your fundamental constitutional rights. Defending you requires more than just knowledge of the criminal code; it requires a deep commitment to protecting the First Amendment. You need an advocate who is ready to fight for your rights on all fronts.
A Staunch Defender of Your First Amendment Rights
This case is not about a simple act; it is about where the government can draw the line on free speech. I believe that this line must be drawn brightly and clearly to protect protestors and advocates from being silenced by those who disagree with them. I will build a defense that is grounded in the principles of the First Amendment, arguing passionately that your conduct was protected speech, not criminal obstruction. This is not just a legal strategy; it is a core conviction.
Navigating the Dual Threat of Criminal and Civil Penalties
You are facing a two-pronged attack: a criminal prosecution by the state and a potential civil lawsuit by the alleged victim. You need an attorney who understands how to build a unified defense against both threats. My goal in the criminal case is not only to achieve a dismissal or acquittal, but to do so in a way that demolishes the factual basis for any subsequent civil suit, protecting both your liberty and your financial future.
Experience in Politically Charged Cases Across Minnesota
Cases like these are not decided in a vacuum. They are often influenced by the political climate of the community and the specific leanings of the local prosecutor’s office. I have defended clients in these sensitive and high-profile cases in courts throughout Minnesota. I know how to navigate the unique pressures of a politically charged case and how to focus the judge and jury on the only thing that matters: the evidence and the law.
Turning the Tables on the Prosecution
The state will try to paint you as a lawless extremist. We will turn the tables and show that it is the government that has overreached, misapplying a statute to criminalize constitutionally protected activity. We will put their evidence on trial, challenge their witnesses, and argue that you are the one who was wronged. By aggressively defending your rights, we send a clear message that you will not be intimidated and you will not be silenced.