Reply #39: Though challenged, both statutes upheld by Minnesota Court of Appeals ... [View All]

[TahitiNut]

S Y L L A B U S

A person who surreptitiously gazes, stares, or peeps over a partition in a public restroom with the intent to intrude upon or interfere with the privacy of another person is guilty of interference with privacy, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.746 (2002).

<snip>
D E C I S I O N

Because a reasonable person when using a public restroom has an expectation of privacy in that place shielded from public view by partitions and his body, and because the space above each partitioned urinal in a public restroom constitutes an aperture under section 609.746, we conclude that the district court did not err by denying Ulmer’s motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause.

Affirmed.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mn&vol=apppub%5C0608%5Copa051148-0808&invol=1

... and ...

Section 609.72, subdivision 1(3), provides:

Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place * * * knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:

* * * *

(3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mn&vol=appunpub%5C0006%5C1555&invol=1