Supreme Court Digest: Sept. 6, 2023

Criminal

Indecent Exposure

Location

This case presented the question of whether an individual who willfully and lewdly exposes himself in the privately owned, partially enclosed backyard of his home has done so in a “public place, or in any place where others are present” within the meaning of the indecent-exposure statute, Minn. Stat. § 617.23, subd. 1. A jury found petitioner guilty of gross-misdemeanor indecent exposure, and petitioner later filed a petition for postconviction relief, arguing that the State failed to produce evidence sufficient to sustain his conviction. The District Court denied the petition, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.

The Supreme Court held that (1) willful and lewd exposure occurs “in any place where others are present” under the indecent-exposure statute if the exposure is reasonably capable of being viewed by others; (2) the State presented sufficient evidence that petitioner exposed himself “in any place where others are present” under the indecent-exposure statute, where petitioner was in a partially-enclosed backyard in clear view from the back porch of another residential property located directly across a public alley from petitioner’s location. Affirmed.

A21-1619 Fordyce v. State (Court of Appeals)

Searches

Probable Cause

The question in this case was whether police had probable cause to search the vehicle that defendant was driving. Police initiated a traffic stop after receiving a tip from an informant that a man had a firearm in the vehicle. During their search, police found a firearm in the vehicle, and the State charged defendant with being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm. The District Court granted defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence discovered in the vehicle, including the firearm, holding that police did not have probable cause to search. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

The Supreme Court held that, because the informant was reliable and personally observed the reported conduct, and police corroborated details of the informant’s report, police had probable cause to search the vehicle that respondent was driving. Reversed and remanded.

A22-1073 State v. Mosley (Court of Appeals)