Reviewed by the Marketing Team Last updated
Prior sex offenses or accusations are not automatically admissible in a Minnesota criminal trial. Rule 404(b) generally prohibits using another act simply to argue that someone has a criminal character and therefore committed the charged offense. A prosecutor may seek admission for a permitted purpose, but the judge must apply the governing evidence rules. Domestic-conduct evidence can involve a separate statute and a different test.
If prosecutors want to introduce your history, a Minnesota sex crimes defense attorney can examine the notice, supporting evidence and proposed use before trial.
General rule: prior crimes are not automatically admissible
Under Minnesota Rule of Evidence 404(b), other crimes, wrongs or acts cannot be used to prove character in order to show conduct consistent with that character. In other words, the prosecution cannot use this rule simply to argue, “You did it before, so you did it again.”
Other acts may be offered for a different purpose, such as motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident. Minnesota lawyers often call this Spreigl evidence. Naming a permitted purpose does not, by itself, make an allegation admissible.
What must prosecutors establish for Spreigl evidence?
Rule 404(b) requires notice consistent with the criminal-procedure rules, including a summary of the other acts and the specific purposes for which the evidence is offered. The court must also determine that:
- The evidence is relevant to an identified material issue other than character or conduct consistent with character.
- The other act and the defendant’s participation in it are proven by clear and convincing evidence.
- The evidence’s probative value is not outweighed by its potential for unfair prejudice.
Similarity, timing and the connection to the disputed issue can matter. Similar conduct involving another person does not automatically satisfy the rule. Likewise, disputing consent or claiming a mistake does not automatically open the door to every past accusation. The defense can seek a ruling before the jury hears the evidence.
Domestic relationship evidence follows a separate statute
Minnesota Statutes section 634.20 addresses evidence of domestic conduct by the accused against the victim of domestic conduct or other family or household members. Its definitions and relationship requirements matter. It is not a blanket exception allowing all prior sexual misconduct in every sex-crime case.
For qualifying domestic conduct, the statute permits admission unless the probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusion, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasted time or needless cumulative evidence. This differs from the Rule 404(b) test. An attorney should identify the actual legal basis the prosecutor invokes rather than treating every relationship-evidence request as a Spreigl request.
How defense attorneys challenge prior-act evidence
The concern is that jurors may focus on a person’s history instead of whether the state proved the current charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Depending on the governing rule and the record, a defense attorney may:
- Challenge inadequate notice or an unclear stated purpose.
- Explain why the allegation does not establish a material disputed issue.
- Contest whether the evidence proves the act and participation under the applicable standard.
- Identify unreliable accounts, inconsistencies or missing supporting evidence.
- Argue that unfair prejudice requires exclusion.
- Request appropriate limits and jury instructions if evidence is admitted.
A prior conviction is not required for evidence to qualify under Rule 404(b). Conversely, a conviction does not automatically establish admissibility. The judge decides what evidence may be used and for what purpose.
Can old or expunged convictions be used?
An old conviction is not automatically admissible or automatically excluded because of its age. The purpose for offering it and the applicable evidence rule matter.
Expungement does not create an absolute bar to use in a later criminal case. Section 609A.03, subdivisions 7 and 7a, provides circumstances in which sealed records may be accessed for criminal investigations, prosecutions or sentencing. The order, its date and the statutory category can affect access requirements. Access to a sealed record is a separate question from whether its contents are admissible at trial.
Frequently asked questions
Can an accusation that never led to a conviction be introduced?
Potentially. Rule 404(b) covers acts as well as convictions, but the prosecutor still must satisfy its requirements, including clear and convincing proof of the act and the defendant’s participation. An accusation alone is not automatically enough.
Does a similar accusation prove the new charge?
No. Similarity alone does not establish guilt or automatic admissibility. The state retains the burden of proving the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
Does sealing a record mean the prosecutor can never see it?
No. Minnesota’s expungement law allows certain criminal-justice access. A lawyer should review the particular order and statutory exceptions, then separately assess any proposed courtroom use.
Get advice about the evidence in your Minnesota case
Keep copies of notices, court orders and records that your attorney needs to assess the prior allegation. Do not assume that an old or sealed case is irrelevant to the defense discussion.
Contact Martine Law to discuss a Minnesota criminal sexual conduct case and the proposed evidence. A Director of Client Engagement is a non-attorney who can assist with intake and scheduling; legal advice and evidence strategy come from an attorney.
