Minnesota Theft, Burglary & Fraud Lawyer: Charges & Defenses

Theft and property cases in Minnesota turn on more than whether something changed hands or property was damaged. The prosecution must prove the particular charging theory, the required intent, the value or type of property, and the accused person’s role. In a burglary case, it must also prove the entry and the independent crime alleged. In a robbery case, force and timing matter. In a fraud case, the words, records, authorization, and flow of money usually matter more than the label chosen by an investigator.

Those distinctions are not technicalities. They determine whether an allegation is a misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, or felony; whether a five-, ten-, or twenty-year statutory maximum applies; whether multiple transactions can be aggregated; and whether the state has charged the correct offense at all. A good defense therefore starts with the exact statute and subdivision, then reconstructs the evidence transaction by transaction.

This guide explains Minnesota theft, burglary, robbery, identity theft, financial-card fraud, receiving stolen property, property damage, and related charges. It also addresses valuation, claim of right, digital evidence, searches, restitution, sentencing, and the practical work of building a defense. It is general information, not legal advice for an individual case.

What to do after a Minnesota theft, burglary, or fraud accusation

Do not give an explanation before counsel has reviewed the allegation and the records. Property cases often begin with a business owner, family member, employer, store investigator, bank, or insurer presenting one side of a complicated relationship. An immediate answer may lock a person into dates, amounts, or assumptions that later prove incomplete. A statement such as “I planned to pay it back,” “I was only borrowing it,” or “I used the account with permission” may be used to establish possession, access, or knowledge even if the speaker meant it as a defense.

Preserve the original evidence. Save complete message threads, contracts, invoices, receipts, account statements, payroll records, location history, photographs, shared-account permissions, return records, and communications about ownership. Do not crop screenshots or forward only selected excerpts. Metadata, surrounding messages, and the sequence of events can be as important as the words on the screen. If an employer controls the relevant email or software, counsel can send a prompt preservation request.

Do not alter, delete, return, sell, or transfer disputed property without legal advice. Returning an item may be appropriate, but an improvised return can create a misleading record or violate a no-contact condition. Deleting files or asking someone to change a story creates separate evidentiary problems. If police have a warrant, do not physically interfere; note what was taken and request a copy of the warrant and inventory.

A criminal complaint is the state’s initial theory. It is not a finding of guilt, and it may rely heavily on a complainant’s estimate, a store’s spreadsheet, or an investigator’s summary. The defense should obtain the underlying material and test each conclusion independently.

What does Minnesota law define as theft?

Minnesota’s general theft statute, Minn. Stat. § 609.52 (2026), contains many distinct forms of theft. The familiar form is intentionally taking, using, transferring, concealing, or retaining another person’s movable property without consent and without claim of right, with intent to deprive the owner permanently. But section 609.52 also addresses theft by false representation, theft by swindle, temporary control in specified circumstances, lost property, rental property, trade secrets, services, diverted corporate property, motor vehicles, and wage theft.

Because these clauses require different proof, “charged with theft” is not a complete description. The complaint should identify the subdivision and clause. The defense should then ask which act is alleged, what mental state applies, who owned or possessed the property, whether consent existed, and what evidence establishes value.

Intent to deprive

For ordinary taking under section 609.52, subdivision 2(a)(1), the state must prove intent to deprive the owner permanently. Intent is ordinarily inferred from circumstances: concealment, sale, disposal, denial, use inconsistent with permission, duration, efforts to return the property, and statements before or after the event. The jury should not be invited to treat every unexplained possession or late return as proof of the required intent without examining the context.

Minnesota also criminalizes specified temporary control when the conduct manifests indifference to the owner’s rights or restoration of the property, subjects it to an adverse claim, or conditions return on payment. That means “I meant to give it back” is not automatically a complete defense. The applicable clause and evidence of the person’s actual plan matter.

Claim of right, consent, and ownership disputes

An honest claim of right can defeat an element of ordinary theft. These disputes arise with jointly acquired property, former romantic partners, family businesses, contractors, commissions, liens, setoffs, and property left after a move. Section 609.52 defines “property of another” broadly and can include property in which the accused has a subordinate interest, so partial ownership is not always the end of the analysis. But a good-faith claim may still be legally important.

Consent can be express or shown by the parties’ course of conduct. It can also be limited or revoked. A person may have permission to use a card for groceries but not cash advances; to drive a vehicle but not sell it; or to access business software but not move company funds. The defense should identify the source, scope, timing, and revocation of any authorization instead of reducing the dispute to a yes-or-no question.

Theft by swindle and false representation

Theft by false representation under section 609.52, subdivision 2(a)(3), requires an intentionally false representation, known to be false, made with intent to defraud, that actually defrauds the recipient. The statute states that a promise made with intent not to perform can qualify, but failure to perform is not by itself proof of that intent without other substantial evidence.

Theft by swindle under clause (4) addresses obtaining property or services by artifice, trick, device, or another swindling means. In both settings, the defense should distinguish a criminal deception from a failed business, contract dispute, accounting error, or promise that became impossible to perform. The person’s knowledge when the representation was made is usually central.

Motor-vehicle theft does not necessarily require movement

Motor-vehicle theft includes taking or driving a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent while knowing or having reason to know consent was absent. In State v. Thonesavanh, 904 N.W.2d 432, 435 (Minn. 2017), the Minnesota Supreme Court held: “The word ‘takes’ in the motor-vehicle-theft statute . . . requires only adverse possession of a vehicle.” The car in that case had not moved. Read the official Thonesavanh opinion.

The holding does not eliminate the other elements. The state must still prove the accused took or drove the vehicle, lacked consent, and knew or had reason to know that the owner or authorized agent did not consent. Borrowed vehicles, informal permission, mistaken identity, passengers, and shared access can create genuine disputes.

Property value and Minnesota theft penalties

Value often determines the offense level. Under section 609.52, value generally means retail market value at the time of the theft. If that value cannot be ascertained, the statute uses reasonable replacement cost. Special rules apply to checks, trade secrets, temporary use, rental property, and wage theft. The complainant’s purchase price or emotional attachment is not necessarily the statutory measure.

Current ordinary value levels include:

• More than $5,000: a felony with a maximum of ten years and a $20,000 fine.
• More than $1,000 but not more than $5,000: a felony with a maximum of five years and a $10,000 fine.
• More than $500 but not more than $1,000: ordinarily a gross misdemeanor with a maximum of 364 days and a $3,000 fine.
• $500 or less: ordinarily a misdemeanor with a maximum of 90 days and a $1,000 fine.

Those are not universal classifications. A firearm, motor vehicle, controlled substance, trade secret, property taken from a person, public funds, a recent qualifying conviction, risk of bodily harm, or a vulnerable-adult victim can change the level or maximum. Certain fraud, swindle, wage-theft, and related offenses involving more than $35,000 carry a twenty-year maximum. Always read the exact clause and current statute.

How the defense challenges valuation

Retail price tags, replacement estimates, and insurance claims can overstate legal value. Used property may have a lower market value. Damaged goods may not be worth the original purchase price. Business inventory records may count items that were returned, duplicated, discounted, or never in stock. Digital services and employee-time calculations may rest on assumptions rather than actual loss.

A valuation defense can use comparable sales, depreciation, photographs, repair records, expert appraisal, store pricing data, and testimony about condition. Crossing a $500, $1,000, $5,000, or $35,000 threshold may materially change exposure, so a valuation issue should not be treated as a sentencing detail.

Aggregation of alleged transactions

Section 609.52 permits aggregation for specified theft theories within a six-month period. Aggregation can turn several small allegations into a felony. The defense should verify that every transaction falls within an eligible clause, the same accused person is tied to each transaction, the date range is correct, and credits or returns have been applied. A summary total is only as reliable as its individual entries.

Minnesota burglary charges

Burglary is not simply “breaking into a house.” Minnesota law generally requires entering a building without consent with intent to commit a crime, or entering without consent and committing the specified crime inside. Depending on the degree, the building, presence of another person, weapon, assault, tool, and intended or completed offense can matter. “Building,” “dwelling,” “enters,” and “enters without consent” have statutory definitions in Minn. Stat. § 609.581 (2026).

First-degree burglary

Under Minn. Stat. § 609.582, subd. 1 (2026), first-degree burglary applies when the underlying burglary involves one of three circumstances: the building is a dwelling and a non-accomplice is present; the accused possesses a dangerous weapon, an article made or used to appear to be one, or an explosive; or the accused assaults a person within the building or on its appurtenant property.

The statutory maximum is 20 years and a $35,000 fine. A first-degree burglary of an occupied dwelling under subdivision 1(a) carries a statutory minimum commitment of six months. Weapon and assault allegations must be proved under the specific clause; they should not be assumed merely because an object was somewhere in the building or a confrontation occurred later.

Second-degree burglary

Second-degree burglary carries a ten-year maximum and a $20,000 fine. It includes burglary of a dwelling, forcible entry into specified banking or controlled-substance businesses, burglary while possessing a tool to gain access to money or property, and specified theft or damage crimes in government buildings, religious establishments, historic property, or schools.

“Burglary tool” is not limited to a crowbar or lock pick. The charge can depend on the object, how it was possessed, and the alleged purpose. Ordinary tools found in a work vehicle do not speak for themselves. Location, timing, fingerprints, messages, and the surrounding acts may strengthen or weaken the inference of criminal purpose.

Third-degree burglary

Third-degree burglary generally covers nonconsensual entry with intent to steal or commit a felony or gross misdemeanor, or commission of that offense inside. The maximum is five years and a $10,000 fine. Current law also includes a provision addressing theft from certain buildings open to the public after a trespass notice and a qualifying recent conviction.

Entry without consent and the independent crime

Burglary requires more than trespass. The state must prove the intended or completed independent crime required by the charged subdivision. That issue can be decisive when a person entered during a relationship dispute, returned for belongings, misunderstood an invitation, or went into a public business. Permission to enter may have existed, been limited to certain areas, or been withdrawn. Video, access records, texts, lease documents, and witness accounts should be lined up chronologically.

Intent is often inferred from forced entry, concealment, time of day, tools, conduct inside, statements, and property movement. But the defense should test whether the inference is the only reasonable one and whether the state has identified the same independent crime alleged in the charge and jury instructions.

Simple robbery, aggravated robbery, and carjacking

Robbery combines a taking with force or a threat of imminent force. Under Minn. Stat. § 609.24 (2026), simple robbery requires knowledge that the person is not entitled to the property, taking personal property from another person or in another’s presence, and using or threatening imminent force to overcome resistance or compel acquiescence in taking or carrying away the property. The statutory maximum is ten years and a $20,000 fine.

Timing matters. A shove used to accomplish or retain a taking presents a different legal question from an unrelated argument that happened earlier or later. The defense should isolate the alleged force, identify who used it, and compare witness accounts with video, injuries, and the property’s location.

What “personal property” means in a robbery case

In State v. Bowen, 910 N.W.2d 39, 42 (Minn. Ct. App. 2018), the court held: “The term ‘personal property’ . . . means all property that is not real property.” It includes property belonging to a business as well as a human being. Read the official published Bowen opinion.

Aggravated robbery

Minn. Stat. § 609.245 (2026) defines two degrees. First-degree aggravated robbery applies when, during a robbery, the person is armed with a dangerous weapon or an article used or fashioned to make the victim reasonably believe it is a dangerous weapon, or inflicts bodily harm. The maximum is 20 years and a $35,000 fine. Second-degree aggravated robbery applies when the person implies by word or act that the person possesses a dangerous weapon; its maximum is 15 years and a $30,000 fine.

A weapon need not always be recovered, but the prosecution still must prove the words or acts that support the charged degree. Descriptions, lighting, distance, body-camera recordings, surveillance, and witness confidence matter. First-degree bodily-harm allegations require proof of harm connected to the robbery, not merely an accusation that the encounter was frightening.

Carjacking

Minnesota separately criminalizes carjacking in Minn. Stat. § 609.247 (2026). The degrees depend on circumstances including force, weapon allegations, bodily harm, and whether another person was present in the vehicle. Identification is frequently central. Eyewitness procedures, phone location, vehicle data, fingerprints, DNA, license-plate-reader records, and possession after the event should be evaluated together rather than in isolation.

Fraud, identity theft, and financial-card charges

Fraud cases are document cases. The state may present a large volume of statements, applications, messages, IP logs, and spreadsheets, but volume is not the same as proof. The defense should build a transaction table showing date, amount, account, device, alleged representation, recipient, authorization, benefit, and supporting exhibit. That process often reveals duplicate losses, missing records, activity by another user, or a representation that was accurate when made.

Identity theft

Under Minn. Stat. § 609.527 (2026), a person commits identity theft by transferring, possessing, or using an identity that is not the person’s own with intent to commit, aid, or abet unlawful activity. The penalty depends on the number of direct victims, combined direct and indirect loss, and certain subject matter. The statute defines “identity” broadly and includes identifying information beyond a name or Social Security number.

The state must prove attribution and unlawful intent. Shared devices, family accounts, workplace access, data breaches, automatic logins, and third-party account recovery can complicate attribution. An IP address may identify a connection, not the human being who acted. The defense should seek login history, device identifiers, recovery events, full provider records, and evidence of who controlled the account at the relevant time.

Financial transaction card fraud

Minn. Stat. § 609.821 (2026) covers several forms of financial transaction card fraud, including prohibited use, possession, trafficking, and false representations, with elements and penalties that vary by subdivision. Permission is often the key dispute. A cardholder may authorize some purchases, set a dollar limit, permit recurring use, or later dispute transactions after a relationship ends. Texts, past practices, account alerts, merchant records, and the timing of revocation matter.

Forgery and check offenses

Forgery and check charges may arise under Minn. Stat. § 609.63 (2026) and Minn. Stat. § 609.631 (2026). The exact act—falsely making, altering, possessing, or offering an instrument—and the required intent should be identified. Handwriting assumptions, mobile deposit images, endorsement authority, account ownership, and bank processing records can all be disputed.

Business, insurance, and public-benefit investigations

Financial investigations may also involve insurance fraud, medical-assistance fraud, unemployment benefits, public assistance, mortgage fraud, or false statements to a financial institution. Those offenses have their own statutes and definitions. A defense should not rely on the general theft elements if the complaint charges a specialized provision.

These matters often begin with an audit rather than an arrest. Early counsel can preserve the database as it existed, identify the person responsible for entries, separate billing error from intentional deception, and coordinate any response to an agency subpoena. A rushed interview may turn an accounting dispute into an alleged admission.

Receiving stolen property and related property offenses

Receiving stolen property

Minn. Stat. § 609.53 (2026) prohibits receiving, possessing, transferring, buying, or concealing property when the person knows or has reason to know it was stolen or obtained by robbery. The central dispute is often knowledge. A low price, altered serial number, unusual meeting, inconsistent story, or recent theft may support an inference; a documented purchase, normal marketplace listing, unchanged serial number, or credible source may support the defense.

Possession must also be proved. Property found in a shared garage, vehicle, storage unit, or online account requires evidence tying it to the accused. Ownership of the location alone does not resolve who knew about and controlled the item.

Possession of burglary or theft tools

Minn. Stat. § 609.625 (2026) addresses possessing a device, explosive, or other instrumentality with intent to use or permit its use to commit burglary or theft. The object alone is not enough; intent is an element. Mechanics, contractors, locksmiths, maintenance workers, and hobbyists may lawfully possess tools that can also be misused.

Criminal damage to property

Minn. Stat. § 609.595 (2026) grades property damage using value and specified circumstances. The state must prove intentional damage without consent and the facts supporting the charged degree. Repair estimates can include improvements, unrelated work, or replacement when repair was possible. Photographs, preexisting damage, depreciation, invoices, and expert review may change both the charge and restitution claim.

Arson

Arson charges under Minn. Stat. § 609.561 (2026) and related sections involve fire or explosives, the type of property, occupancy, risk, intent, and in some degrees value. Cause-and-origin evidence is specialized. The defense may need an independent fire investigator to evaluate accidental ignition, electrical failure, laboratory results, burn patterns, scene preservation, and whether the official conclusion followed accepted methodology.

Organized retail theft

Minn. Stat. § 609.522 (2026) separately addresses organized retail theft. Prosecutors may rely on surveillance across stores, social-media listings, communications, and alleged coordination. The defense should distinguish personal conduct from association, verify identification at each event, and test the aggregation and enterprise allegations rather than accepting a retailer’s compiled presentation.

Common defenses and evidence disputes

Mistaken identity

Retail video may be distant or incomplete. Witness descriptions may change after seeing a social-media image or police lineup. License plates can be misread, accounts can be shared, and clothing is not unique. The defense should obtain the original video rather than a compressed clip, document the identification procedure, compare time stamps, and develop objective location evidence.

Lack of criminal intent

Mistake, accident, forgotten merchandise, an accounting error, a failed promise, or a genuine ownership dispute is not automatically theft or fraud. The defense should identify contemporaneous evidence of state of mind: efforts to pay, requests for clarification, consistent records, efforts to return property, advice received, and conduct before anyone threatened police involvement.

Consent and authorization

Authorization can arise from words, documents, prior practice, employment duties, or shared accounts. It can be narrower than either side now claims. A useful chronology identifies each grant of permission, any limit, any revocation, and what the accused knew at the time of the act.

Claim of right

A good-faith claim should be supported with contracts, ownership records, invoices, lien documents, business agreements, or communications. Anger or poor judgment does not necessarily eliminate honest belief, but taking property as self-help can remain legally risky. The specific theft clause controls whether claim of right defeats an element.

Unproven value or loss

The charge may depend on a spreadsheet that includes taxes, retail markup, projected profit, investigative time, or transactions unrelated to the accused. Criminal value and restitution are related but distinct questions. Each number should be sourced, and payments, returns, chargebacks, insurance recovery, and recovered property should be identified.

Illegal searches and overbroad digital warrants

Police need a lawful basis to seize and search a home, vehicle, phone, cloud account, or business records. A warrant must be supported by probable cause and describe the place and things to be searched with sufficient particularity. A fraud warrant that permits years of unrestricted phone data may raise scope concerns. The defense should examine the affidavit, dates, accounts, devices, search protocol, and what officers actually reviewed.

Consent must be voluntary and within the consenting person’s authority. An employer may control a company device but not every private account accessed on it. A spouse or roommate may share a space without authority over a locked container. Evidence obtained through an unconstitutional search may be subject to suppression.

Statements and private investigators

Store security and insurance investigators are usually private actors, so constitutional rules may apply differently than they do to police. But voluntariness, accuracy, completeness, promises, and recording still matter. Once law enforcement directs or participates in questioning, additional legal issues can arise. The defense should obtain the full recording and any notes rather than rely on a paraphrase.

Alternative perpetrator and third-party access

A defense may show that another person had access, motive, opportunity, or control. Courts impose evidentiary requirements on alternative-perpetrator evidence, so counsel should develop a concrete connection rather than speculation. Device logs, access cards, passwords, surveillance, schedules, and transaction destinations can supply that connection.

How a Minnesota property-crime defense is built

The work begins with the complaint, statute, release conditions, and discovery inventory. Counsel should identify every alleged transaction, item, victim, and loss; chart the elements; and note what evidence supposedly proves each one. Store or employer summaries must be traced to original records. Video should be obtained in native format when possible.

Next comes chronology. Property and fraud cases often look different when communications, permissions, payments, account access, and returns are placed in order. A timeline can expose that an alleged false statement was true when made, that permission was revoked only after the disputed use, or that another user accessed the account.

Then counsel should separate guilt issues from damage issues. Did the accused act? Was there consent? What was the intent? What was the property worth? Was force connected to a taking? Did an entry lack consent? Was the independent crime proved? Is the loss calculation admissible and accurate? Treating those as separate questions prevents a large claimed loss from substituting for proof of criminal intent.

Finally, the defense compares litigation with resolution. A suppression motion, valuation hearing, expert review, restitution challenge, trial, diversion proposal, or negotiated reduction may be appropriate. The right choice depends on the evidence, record, immigration and licensing concerns, financial ability, and the client’s priorities.

Restitution, sentencing, and collateral consequences

Statutory maximums are not automatic sentences. Felony sentencing usually begins with the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and the person’s criminal-history score. Offense severity, custody status, prior convictions, multiple current counts, weapon findings, and departure grounds can change the presumptive result. Misdemeanor and gross-misdemeanor sentencing gives the district court broader discretion within the statutory maximum.

Restitution

A court may order restitution for compensable loss caused by the offense. The prosecution or victim must provide information supporting the amount, and Minnesota procedure imposes deadlines for challenging it. Restitution should not automatically equal an insurer’s demand, retail sticker price, or an employer’s internal estimate. Causation, proof, recovered property, depreciation, insurance, and the relationship between claimed expenses and the conviction all matter.

A plea agreement should say whether restitution is capped, contested, or left open. An uncapped promise to pay “all losses” can be far more consequential than expected. A defendant who disputes the amount should preserve the objection and follow the statutory affidavit and hearing procedure.

Collateral consequences

A theft, fraud, burglary, or robbery conviction can affect employment, professional licensing, housing, immigration, firearm rights, financial-industry work, security clearances, and credibility in later proceedings. A felony may trigger civil-right consequences even if execution of prison time is stayed. Some offenses may later qualify for expungement, but waiting periods and eligibility depend on the disposition and offense.

Financial cases can also produce forfeiture, civil demands, tax issues, licensing investigations, and parallel lawsuits. Resolving the criminal count does not necessarily resolve those matters. Counsel should identify them before a plea, not after sentencing.

Frequently asked questions about Minnesota theft and property charges

1. Is theft under $1,000 a felony in Minnesota?

Ordinarily, theft over $500 but not over $1,000 is a gross misdemeanor, while $500 or less is a misdemeanor. But property type, prior qualifying convictions, taking from a person, a motor vehicle, public funds, risk of harm, or another statutory circumstance can make a low-value theft a felony. The clause on the complaint controls.

2. What value makes theft a felony?

Ordinary theft becomes a felony when value exceeds $1,000. Theft exceeding $5,000 carries a higher maximum. Certain property and conduct are felonies regardless of ordinary value, and specified serious fraud or other theft over $35,000 can carry a twenty-year maximum.

3. How is stolen property valued?

The general rule is retail market value at the time of the theft. If that cannot be ascertained, reasonable replacement cost may apply. Checks, rentals, temporary use, trade secrets, and wage theft have special rules. Purchase price is evidence, not always the answer.

4. Is returning property a defense to theft?

Not automatically. Return can be relevant to intent and loss, but some theft theories are complete upon taking or criminalize specified temporary control. Return made only after discovery may be viewed differently from a prompt effort showing mistake. The exact statutory clause matters.

5. Can I be charged for property I partly own?

Possibly. Minnesota’s definition of “property of another” can include property in which the accused is a co-owner or has a subordinate interest, subject to statutory language and exceptions. A genuine claim of right, agreement, lien, or ownership record may still be important.

6. What is the difference between theft and receiving stolen property?

Theft focuses on the prohibited taking, deception, conversion, or other act listed in section 609.52. Receiving stolen property focuses on receiving, possessing, transferring, buying, or concealing property while knowing or having reason to know it was stolen or obtained by robbery.

7. Is burglary always breaking into a home?

No. Burglary can involve various buildings, and force is not always required. The state generally must prove entry without consent plus an intended or completed independent crime. The degree depends on factors such as a dwelling, occupancy, weapon, assault, tool, or protected building.

8. Can shoplifting become burglary?

Current third-degree burglary law can apply to theft in certain public buildings when the person entered within one year after being told not to return and has a qualifying recent conviction. Ordinary retail theft without those additional facts is generally analyzed under theft or organized-retail-theft law.

9. What turns theft into robbery?

Robbery requires taking personal property from a person or in another’s presence and using or threatening imminent force to overcome resistance or compel acquiescence in the taking or carrying away. The connection and timing between force and the property are important.

10. Does police need to recover a weapon for aggravated robbery?

No, not necessarily. First-degree aggravated robbery may involve a dangerous weapon, an object used to appear to be one, or bodily harm. Second degree covers implying possession of a dangerous weapon. The state still must prove the words, conduct, and circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt.

11. What if I had permission to use the card or account?

Permission can defeat an element, but its scope and timing matter. Preserve messages, prior statements, shared-account records, spending limits, and proof of when authorization was revoked. Do not rely on a short selected screenshot if a full thread exists.

12. Can several small transactions be added together?

Yes, section 609.52 allows aggregation for specified theft theories within a six-month period. Other statutes also have their own loss and victim rules. The defense should verify eligibility, dates, attribution, credits, and every amount included.

13. Can the victim drop a Minnesota theft charge?

The prosecutor, not the complaining witness, controls a filed criminal case. A witness’s correction, request, or refusal to participate may affect evidence, but it does not automatically dismiss the charge. No one should pressure a witness or violate a no-contact order.

14. Will I have to pay restitution?

Restitution is common after a property conviction, but the amount must be legally compensable and supported. A defendant may challenge causation, valuation, insurance treatment, recovered property, and unsupported expenses through Minnesota’s required procedure and deadlines.

15. When should I contact a defense lawyer?

Immediately. Surveillance may be overwritten, account logs may be retained only briefly, and employers can change access after an investigation begins. Early counsel can preserve evidence, prevent an uninformed interview, evaluate searches, and address release or no-contact conditions.

Official Minnesota legal sources

• Minn. Stat. § 609.52 (2026) — theft definitions, acts, value, and penalties
• Minn. Stat. § 609.582 (2026) — burglary degrees
• Minn. Stat. § 609.24 (2026) — simple robbery
• Minn. Stat. § 609.245 (2026) — aggravated robbery
• Minn. Stat. § 609.527 (2026) — identity theft
• Minn. Stat. § 609.821 (2026) — financial transaction card fraud
• Minn. Stat. § 609.53 (2026) — receiving stolen property
• Minn. Stat. § 609.595 (2026) — criminal damage to property

Last reviewed against the 2026 Minnesota Statutes. The law in effect on the alleged offense date and the individual facts control.