Nonmonetary Care is not a Defense for Failing to Provide Financial Support as Stipulated in Minn. Statute § 609.375. BY: Mary C.

Link for Opinion: http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.msbcollege.edu/lnacui2api/api/version1/getDocCui?lni=577J-YJ81-F04H-11DY&csi=7839&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true

Title:  Nonmonetary Care is not a Defense for Failing to Provide Financial Support as Stipulated in Minn. Statute § 609.375.

Citation:  823 N.W.2d 908; 2012 Minn. App. LEXIS 139

The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision to exclude evidence of defendant's nonmonetary care for his children that he intended to offer as a defense to the charge of failing to provide care and support for his two minor children in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.375 (2006). 

"Care and support" in the statute refers exclusively to a person's financial obligations to a spouse or child. Defendant's failure to provide nonmonetary care was not an element of the offense and the State was not required to prove that he failed to provide nonmonetary care to his children.

By complaint filed August 14, 2008, the state charged appellant Larry Allen Nelson with felony failure to provide court-ordered support of his two minor children in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.375.  Between July 2004 and May 2008, appellant made five payments totaling less than $1,000, all involuntary. As of April 30, 2008, appellant's total arrears were $83,470.27. 

The appellant moved to dismiss the charge against him. Appellant argued that because Minn. Stat. § 609.375 criminalizes the failure to provide court-ordered "care and support" to one's children, the state was required to prove that he failed to provide his children both nonmonetary care (e.g., companionship, supervision, and emotional care) and monetary support.  Because it was undisputed that appellant provided his children with nonmonetary care, he argued that the state lacked probable cause to charge him. The district court denied appellant's motion.

Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and submitted the matter to the court on stipulated facts pursuant to Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.01, subd. 4. The district court found appellant guilty as charged, stayed the imposition of a sentence for two years, placed appellant on probation subject to various conditions, and stayed the sentence pending the appeal.

The two issues before the Appeals Court are did the district court err in its interpretation of Minn. Stat. § 609.375?  Secondly, did the district court abuse its discretion by excluding as irrelevant any evidence that appellant provided nonmonetary care for his children?

In regard to the first issue, the court ruled the statute as a whole and its intended purpose, that "care and support," as used in Minn. Stat. § 609.375, refers exclusively to a person's financial obligations to a spouse or child.  Appellant's contention that he can avoid prosecution under the statute by demonstrating that he has provided nonmonetary care to his children is wholly without merit.

In the second issue, the court found the challenged evidence in this case is irrelevant to prove a violation of section 609.375; the district court properly granted the state's motion to exclude it.

Judgment: Affirmed.