of people served
rated by clients
available to help
Burglary is a serious property crime in Minnesota, involving unauthorized entry into a building with the intent to commit another crime inside, or actually committing a crime once inside. It’s often misunderstood as simply involving theft, but the core of the offense is the unlawful entry itself, coupled with criminal intent or action. Minnesota Statute § 609.582 outlines four distinct degrees of burglary, ranging from first-degree (the most serious) to fourth-degree (a gross misdemeanor). The specific degree charged depends heavily on various factors, such as the type of building entered (like a dwelling), whether someone else was present, whether the accused possessed a dangerous weapon or burglary tools, and the nature of the crime intended or committed inside. Understanding these distinctions is crucial, as the potential penalties vary significantly between degrees.
The consequences of a burglary conviction under § 609.582 can be severe and long-lasting, extending far beyond potential fines and imprisonment. A conviction, especially a felony-level one (first, second, or third degree), creates a permanent criminal record that can impact future employment, housing opportunities, professional licensing, and even fundamental rights like firearm possession. Because the definition of burglary involves specific elements like entering “without consent” (as defined in § 609.581) and having the requisite “intent,” navigating these charges requires careful legal analysis. The prosecution must prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt, and a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney can scrutinize the evidence and identify potential defenses related to consent, intent, or the specific circumstances alleged.
Minnesota Statute § 609.582 codifies the crime of burglary in the state, detailing the different degrees of the offense and their corresponding elements and maximum penalties. The statute differentiates the severity based on factors present during the commission of the crime, such as the location (dwelling vs. other building), presence of others, possession of weapons or tools, assault, and the type of crime intended or committed.
609.582 BURGLARY.
Subdivision 1. Burglary in the first degree.
Whoever enters a building without consent and with intent to commit a crime, or enters a building without consent and commits a crime while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the first degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 20 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $35,000, or both, if:
(a) the building is a dwelling and another person, not an accomplice, is present in it when the burglar enters or at any time while the burglar is in the building;
(b) the burglar possesses, when entering or at any time while in the building, any of the following: a dangerous weapon, any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim to reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon, or an explosive; or
(c) the burglar assaults a person within the building or on the building’s appurtenant property.
Subd. 1a. Mandatory minimum sentence for burglary of occupied dwelling.
A person convicted of committing burglary of an occupied dwelling, as defined in subdivision 1, clause (a), must be committed to the commissioner of corrections or county workhouse for not less than six months.
Subd. 2. Burglary in the second degree.
(a) Whoever enters a building without consent and with intent to commit a crime, or enters a building without consent and commits a crime while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both, if:
(1) the building is a dwelling;
(2) the portion of the building entered contains a banking business or other business of receiving securities or other valuable papers for deposit or safekeeping and the entry is with force or threat of force;
(3) the portion of the building entered contains a pharmacy or other lawful business or practice in which controlled substances are routinely held or stored, and the entry is forcible; or
(4) when entering or while in the building, the burglar possesses a tool to gain access to money or property.
(b) Whoever enters a government building, religious establishment, historic property, or school building without consent and with intent to commit a crime under section 609.52 or 609.595, or enters a government building, religious establishment, historic property, or school building without consent and commits a crime under section 609.52 or 609.595 while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both.
Subd. 3. Burglary in the third degree.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever enters a building without consent and with intent to steal or commit any felony or gross misdemeanor while in the building, or enters a building without consent and steals or commits a felony or gross misdemeanor while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
(b) Whoever enters a building that is open to the public, other than a building identified in subdivision 2, paragraph (b), with intent to steal while in the building, or enters a building that is open to the public, other than a building identified in subdivision 2, paragraph (b), and steals while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both, if:
(1) the person enters the building within one year after being told to leave the building and not return; and
(2) the person has been convicted within the preceding five years for an offense under this section, section 256.98, 268.182, 609.24, 609.245, 609.52, 609.522, 609.53, 609.625, 609.63, 609.631, or 609.821, or a statute from another state, the United States, or a foreign jurisdiction, in conformity with any of those sections, and the person received a felony sentence for the offense or a sentence that was stayed under section 609.135 if the offense to which a plea was entered would allow imposition of a felony sentence.
Subd. 4. Burglary in the fourth degree.
(a) Whoever enters a building without consent and with intent to commit a misdemeanor other than to steal, or enters a building without consent and commits a misdemeanor other than to steal while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the fourth degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 364 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both.
(b) Whoever enters a building that is open to the public, other than a building identified in subdivision 2, paragraph (b), with intent to steal while in the building, or enters a building that is open to the public, other than a building identified in subdivision 2, paragraph (b), and steals while in the building, either directly or as an accomplice, commits burglary in the fourth degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 364 days or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both, if the person enters the building within one year after being told to leave the building and not return.
To secure a conviction for burglary under Minnesota Statute § 609.582, the prosecution must prove several core elements beyond a reasonable doubt. The specific elements vary slightly depending on the degree charged, but generally involve unlawful entry into a building combined with criminal intent or action. Failure to prove any one of the required elements means the state has not met its burden, and a conviction cannot stand. Understanding these elements is the first step in analyzing any burglary charge and formulating a potential defense strategy. The definitions from § 609.581 are integral to understanding these elements.
The penalties for a burglary conviction in Minnesota vary widely depending on the degree of the offense charged and proven. Minnesota Statute § 609.582 outlines maximum sentences, including potential imprisonment and fines, for each degree. It’s important to remember these are maximums; actual sentences depend on the specific facts, the defendant’s criminal history score, and judicial discretion within sentencing guidelines. However, even lower-degree convictions carry serious consequences.
Burglary under Minnesota Statute § 609.582 encompasses a range of scenarios beyond the common image of a nighttime house break-in. The key is the unauthorized entry combined with criminal intent or action. The specific circumstances surrounding the entry, the type of building, the presence of others, and the nature of the intended or committed crime determine the degree charged. Understanding how different factual situations align with the statute helps clarify the scope of burglary law.
These examples illustrate how varying factors elevate or define the degree of burglary. Whether a weapon was present, if the building was a home versus a business, if someone was inside, or if force was used – all these details are critical under § 609.582. The law aims to address the violation of security and potential danger inherent in unlawfully entering structures for criminal purposes, penalizing intrusions into homes and situations involving weapons or assault most severely.
An individual forces open the back door of a house late at night, knowing the residents are likely asleep inside. The individual is carrying a crowbar, intending to steal electronics. Because the structure is a “dwelling” (§ 609.581) and another person (the resident, not an accomplice) is present (§ 609.582, Subd. 1(a)), this immediately points towards first-degree burglary. Even if the crowbar wasn’t initially intended as a weapon, if it could be perceived as one or used as such, its possession during the entry or while inside could also trigger first-degree charges under Subd. 1(b). The intent to commit a crime (theft) combined with entry into an occupied dwelling or possession of a potential weapon elevates this to the most serious level, facing up to 20 years and a mandatory minimum sentence.
Someone breaks a window to enter a seasonal cabin during the off-season when the owners are not present. The intent is to steal fishing gear stored inside. Although unoccupied, the cabin qualifies as a “dwelling” under § 609.581 (a building used as a temporary residence). Entering a dwelling without consent with the intent to commit a crime (theft) constitutes second-degree burglary under § 609.582, Subd. 2(a)(1). Even though no one was home and no weapon was involved, the fact that the target was a dwelling elevates the charge beyond third or fourth degree. This scenario carries a potential penalty of up to 10 years in prison.
A person was formally trespassed from a retail store a month ago, meaning they were told by management or security not to return. Despite this, the person enters the store during business hours, selects merchandise, and attempts to leave without paying. While entry into a public building is usually with consent (§ 609.581), that consent was explicitly revoked by the prior trespass notice. Under § 609.582, Subd. 3(b), entering a public building (not a specialized one like a school or government building) with intent to steal, within one year of being told not to return, can constitute third-degree burglary if the person also has a qualifying prior conviction within the last five years and received a felony-level sentence (including a stayed sentence). If those prior conviction conditions aren’t met, it might be fourth-degree burglary under Subd. 4(b) or simply theft and trespass.
An individual finds an unlocked door to a closed office building after hours and goes inside. Their intent is not to steal anything, but rather to spray paint graffiti on the walls (criminal damage to property, often a misdemeanor depending on the damage value). Because the entry was without consent (after hours, implied consent withdrawn) and the intent was to commit a misdemeanor other than theft, this fits the definition of fourth-degree burglary under § 609.582, Subd. 4(a). This gross misdemeanor charge carries a maximum penalty of 364 days in jail and/or a $3,000 fine, reflecting a less severe offense than burglaries involving dwellings, weapons, or intent to commit felonies or theft.
Facing a burglary charge under § 609.582 can be daunting, given the potential for serious felony penalties and long-term consequences. However, an accusation is not a conviction. The prosecution carries the burden of proving every single element of the alleged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. A thorough investigation of the facts and a strong defense strategy, often focusing on challenging the prosecution’s ability to meet this burden, can lead to reduced charges, dismissal, or acquittal. Defenses often revolve around negating essential elements like unlawful entry, lack of consent, or criminal intent.
Developing an effective defense requires a careful examination of the specific allegations and the evidence gathered by law enforcement. Did the police conduct a lawful search? Were statements obtained properly? Is the identification of the accused reliable? Beyond procedural issues, substantive defenses attack the core elements defined in the statute. Was there actual consent to enter? Can the prosecution truly prove intent to commit a crime at the time of entry, or did the intent form later? Was the structure legally a “building” or “dwelling”? An experienced criminal defense attorney explores all possible angles, leveraging weaknesses in the state’s case and presenting evidence favorable to the accused.
A fundamental element of burglary is the intent to commit a crime at the time of entering the building without consent (or forming the intent before committing a crime after an unlawful entry). If it can be shown that the defendant entered without any criminal intent, a key element of burglary is missing.
The prosecution must prove the entry was “without consent” as defined in § 609.581. If the defendant had consent, or reasonably believed they had consent, the entry was not unlawful for burglary purposes.
The state must prove the defendant actually “entered” a structure meeting the legal definition of a “building.” Challenging these physical elements can sometimes provide a defense.
In some burglary cases, the identity of the person who committed the offense may be in question. Establishing that the defendant was not the person involved is a complete defense.
Burglary (§ 609.582) involves unlawfully entering a building with intent to commit a crime, or committing one inside. Robbery (§ 609.24, § 609.245) involves taking property from a person or in their presence by using or threatening force. Burglary focuses on the unlawful entry; robbery focuses on the taking from a person with force or threat.
Yes. Burglary can be charged if you enter a building without consent with the intent to commit a crime, even if you don’t actually complete that crime or steal anything. The unlawful entry coupled with the proven intent is sufficient for a burglary charge under § 609.582.
First-degree burglary involves specific aggravating factors: the building entered is an occupied dwelling, the person possesses a dangerous weapon/explosive (or fake weapon), or an assault occurs. Second-degree burglary involves dwellings (occupied or not), banks/pharmacies under certain conditions, possession of burglary tools, or theft/damage in specific public buildings, but lacks the high-level aggravating factors of first degree.
Yes, Minnesota Statute § 609.582, Subd. 1a mandates a minimum sentence of six months incarceration for conviction of first-degree burglary involving an occupied dwelling (Subd. 1(a)). Other burglary convictions are subject to sentencing guidelines but may not have mandatory minimums unless specific enhancements apply.
No, entering a motor vehicle typically falls under Minnesota Statute § 609.52, related to theft from a motor vehicle, or potentially tampering with a motor vehicle (§ 609.605), rather than burglary under § 609.582. Burglary specifically requires entering a “building” as defined in § 609.581.
If you had a genuine and objectively reasonable belief that you had consent to enter the building (a mistake of fact), this could negate the “without consent” element required for a burglary conviction. An attorney would need to evaluate the specific facts supporting this belief.
Generally, you cannot burglarize property you lawfully possess and have the right to enter. However, complex situations like disputes between co-owners or violating a court order (like an Order for Protection barring entry to a shared dwelling) could potentially lead to burglary charges depending on the specific circumstances of lawful possession and consent.
Minnesota Statute § 609.583 defines possessing burglary or theft tools. For second-degree burglary under § 609.582, Subd. 2(a)(4), possessing a tool “to gain access to money or property” during the burglary elevates the charge. This could include crowbars, lock picks, slim jims, or other tools adapted or intended for illicit entry or accessing secured items.
Often, yes. Minnesota courts frequently consider an attached garage part of the “dwelling” for burglary purposes, especially if it’s structurally integrated and used in connection with the residence. This means entering an attached garage without consent to commit a crime could lead to first or second-degree burglary charges.
If you enter a building without consent with the intent to commit a misdemeanor other than theft, or commit such a misdemeanor inside, it constitutes fourth-degree burglary, a gross misdemeanor (§ 609.582, Subd. 4(a)). If the intent was misdemeanor theft, it could still fall under third or fourth degree depending on other circumstances (like prior trespass notices).
Yes. Minnesota Statute § 609.582 explicitly states that someone acting “either directly or as an accomplice” commits burglary. If you intentionally aid, advise, hire, counsel, or conspire with another person to commit burglary, you can be charged and convicted of the same degree of burglary as the primary actor.
No. Burglary only requires entering “without consent.” This can occur through an unlocked door or window, by trickery, or by remaining after consent is withdrawn. Forcible entry is not a universal requirement, although it can be a factor in some specific types of second-degree burglary (e.g., banks, pharmacies).
Voluntary intoxication is generally not a complete defense, but evidence of extreme intoxication might be admissible to argue you were incapable of forming the specific intent required for burglary (the intent to commit a crime upon entry). This is a complex legal argument with limitations under Minnesota law.
Yes. Through negotiation by an attorney, demonstrating weaknesses in the prosecution’s case (e.g., lack of intent, consent issues), or successful pre-trial motions, burglary charges can potentially be reduced to lesser offenses (like trespass or theft) or dismissed entirely.
A prior criminal record impacts the sentencing calculation under Minnesota’s guidelines, potentially leading to a harsher sentence upon conviction. Additionally, for certain types of third and fourth-degree burglary involving re-entry into public buildings (§ 609.582 Subd. 3(b) and 4(b)), specific prior convictions are an element the prosecution must prove.
A burglary conviction under § 609.582, particularly a felony conviction (First, Second, or Third Degree), casts a long shadow over an individual’s life. The consequences reach far beyond the immediate sentence imposed by the court, creating persistent obstacles and limitations. These collateral consequences can affect fundamental aspects of life, including personal freedom, financial stability, and future opportunities, making it critical to address burglary charges with the utmost seriousness and competent legal representation.
Perhaps the most significant long-term impact is the creation of a permanent felony criminal record (for degrees 1-3). This record is readily accessible through background checks used by employers, landlords, educational institutions, and licensing bodies. The stigma associated with a felony, especially one like burglary which implies dishonesty and invasion of property, can lead to automatic disqualification or significant bias against the individual. Even a gross misdemeanor fourth-degree burglary conviction can present challenges, appearing on background checks and potentially raising concerns for employers or landlords seeking trustworthy individuals. This record can follow a person indefinitely unless expunged, a process that is not always available or successful, particularly for felonies.
Finding and maintaining meaningful employment becomes substantially more difficult with a burglary conviction. Many employers are hesitant to hire individuals with felony records, particularly for positions involving trust, security clearance, handling cash or valuables, or access to private property or information. Certain industries and professions, such as education, healthcare, finance, law enforcement, and childcare, often have strict regulations or licensing requirements that automatically disqualify individuals with felony burglary convictions. This can drastically limit career paths and earning potential, contributing to long-term financial instability and underemployment. Overcoming employer reluctance requires significant effort and often limits job choices.
Securing safe and stable housing can be another major hurdle. Landlords and property management companies routinely conduct background checks on potential tenants. A burglary conviction, especially a recent felony, is often grounds for denial of a rental application. Landlords may perceive the individual as a risk to property or other tenants. This can force individuals into less desirable neighborhoods, unstable living situations, or reliance on limited housing options that accept tenants with criminal records. Access to public or subsidized housing programs may also be restricted based on certain criminal convictions, further exacerbating housing instability for those with limited financial means.
A felony burglary conviction in Minnesota results in the loss of certain civil rights. Most notably, individuals convicted of felonies lose the right to possess firearms and ammunition under both state and federal law. Restoring these rights is a separate, often difficult legal process that may not be possible. Felony convictions also result in the loss of the right to vote until the sentence is fully discharged (including probation or parole) and the loss of the right to serve on a jury. While voting rights are restored upon completion of the sentence, the firearm prohibition is typically lifetime unless specifically restored by a court.
When accused of burglary under Minnesota Statute § 609.582, the first challenge is understanding the precise nature of the charges and the potentially severe consequences. The statute outlines four different degrees, each with specific elements and vastly different maximum penalties, including potential mandatory minimum sentences. An attorney experienced in Minnesota criminal law can dissect the prosecution’s complaint, explain exactly which degree is charged, what specific elements the state must prove (like entry without consent, intent, dwelling status, weapon possession), and what the potential sentencing range is based on the charge and the individual’s criminal history. This clarity is essential for making informed decisions about how to proceed, whether through negotiation or trial. Without this understanding, navigating the legal process is fraught with risk.
A crucial role of a criminal defense attorney is to conduct an independent investigation into the allegations, rather than simply relying on the police reports provided by the prosecution. This involves reviewing all discovery materials, potentially visiting the scene of the alleged incident, interviewing defense witnesses, and identifying inconsistencies or weaknesses in the state’s evidence. The attorney looks for violations of constitutional rights, such as unlawful searches or seizures, improperly obtained statements, or suggestive identification procedures. Gathering favorable evidence, like proof of consent, alibi evidence, or information challenging the credibility of prosecution witnesses, is vital for building a strong defense against the specific elements outlined in § 609.582.
Based on a thorough investigation and analysis of the law, the attorney develops a tailored defense strategy. This might involve challenging the prosecution’s ability to prove essential elements like “entry,” “without consent,” or the necessary “intent” to commit a crime. Defenses could focus on mistaken identity, consent, lack of intent due to mistake or intoxication (in limited circumstances), or arguing that the structure wasn’t a “building” or “dwelling” as legally defined. The attorney files necessary pre-trial motions, such as motions to suppress illegally obtained evidence or motions to dismiss charges lacking sufficient proof. If the case proceeds to trial, the attorney presents the defense case, cross-examines prosecution witnesses, and argues zealously to create reasonable doubt regarding the § 609.582 elements.
Often, criminal cases are resolved through plea negotiations. An attorney uses their knowledge of the case’s strengths and weaknesses, the prosecutor’s tendencies, and the relevant law (§ 609.582 and sentencing guidelines) to negotiate for the best possible outcome. This might involve seeking a dismissal, a reduction to a less serious charge (like trespass or misdemeanor theft instead of felony burglary), or an agreement for a more lenient sentence. If a conviction occurs, either through a plea or trial, the attorney advocates vigorously at sentencing, presenting mitigating factors and arguments for the lowest possible penalty within the legal framework, aiming to minimize the significant long-term consequences associated with a burglary conviction. Their advocacy at this critical stage can significantly impact the final sentence.
