§ 630.12
Citing Cases (1)
Minnesota Supreme Court
State of Minnesota v. Don Antoine Jones · 2014 1 citation
Applying the plain meaning of “proceeding,” we conclude that the phrase “[a]ny proceeding under this section” does not refer to a criminal prosecution for an alleged violation of Minn. Stat. § 518B.01, *536 subd. 14. Section 518B.01, subdivision 14, creates a criminal offense. That is a substantive means of redressing a violation of an order for protection, not a procedural means of seeking redress of that offense from a tribunal or agency. The procedural means for seeking redress for a criminal offense, including a violation of an order for protection, is set forth in the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure and several statutes, including Minn. Stat. § 484.87 (2012) (prescribing the pleading, practice, and procedure in criminal proceedings); Minn. Stat., §§ 628.01-.26 (2012) (prescribing the procedural requirements for a criminal indictment); Minn. Stat. §§ 630.12-.37 (2012) (prescribing pretrial procedures in a criminal case); and Minn. Stat. §§ 631.02-.21 (2012) (prescribing trial procedures in a criminal case). Section 518B.01 does not provide the procedural means to criminally prosecute a violation of an order for protection. Rather, section 518B.01, subdivision 4, provides a procedural means to seek an order for protection. By its terms, section 518B.01, subdivision 4, creates “an action known as a petition for an order for protection” and then sets forth the procedure that a private party may use to obtain an order for protection from a district court that has jurisdiction. Accordingly, the phrase “[a]ny proceeding under this section” as used in section 518B.01, subdivision 16, does not refer to a criminal prosecution for violating an order for protection. Rather, that phrase refers to an action to obtain an order for protection from a court that has jurisdiction. Because the phrase “[a]ny proceeding under this section” does not refer to a criminal prosecution for violating an order for protection, we reject the State’s contention that a criminal conviction and sentence for violation of an order for protection are “in addition to other ... criminal remedies” within the meaning of section 518B.01, subdivision 16.