Understanding Minnesota Law Concerning OFP, HRO, and DANCO
OFP, HRO and DANCO refer to orders that are put in place when a person alleges they are afraid of unwanted contact. While parsing out the meaning of legal jargon can seem intimidating, the difference between these terms is actually quite straightforward.
St. Paul Criminal Lawyer John Lesch can help guide you through the process as an experienced criminal attorney experienced with handling OFP, HRO and DANCO issues. Contact Lesch Law for a free, confidential case evaluation.
Based in St. Paul, we practice throughout Ramsey County, Hennepin County and throughout the Twin Cities.
What is an Order for Protection (OFP) in Minnesota?
An Order for Protection (OFP) is filed when there is a previous household, sexual, or familial relationship. This is a civil order, meaning that it doesn’t necessarily have to come as a result of alleged criminal conduct , although police can open a separate criminal case as a result of an incident that led to filing for an OFP. An OFP is a family court matter and is not resolved through a criminal court process. A person must be alleged to have harmed, have threatened to harm, or interrupted the person filing from calling 911 to have an OFP granted against them. The person must have or have had a close personal relationship with the alleged harmer in the form of a a dating, sexual, roommate or familial relationship.
An OFP is flexible and could mean many things in different circumstances. Examples of restrictions/compulsions the court might inflict are: restricting entrance to areas the person filing the OFP is in or is often in, mandatory counseling sessions, a change in parenting time or custody of a child, an order for restitution (the court mandating a payment to the person filing the OFP), a prohibition of owning firearms, and more.
An OFP is also flexible in terms of what conduct leads to the OFP. Harming a person’s property or killing a person’s pets can be considered threatening harm. Criminal sexual conduct, like sexual assault, can be the impetus for an OFP.
The statute governing Orders for Protection mandates that a person must be a “family or household member” in order to be eligible to file for an OFP. Specifically, the statute notes that the following are those included as family or household members:
- spouses and former spouses;
- parents and children;
- persons related by blood;
- persons who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past;
- persons who have a child in common regardless of whether they have been married or have lived together at any time;
- a man and woman if the woman is pregnant and the man is alleged to be the father, regardless of whether they have been married or have lived together at any time; and
- persons involved in a significant romantic or sexual relationship.
However, this definition does not cover every situation that could occur. Whether one could obtain an OFP against a third cousins, stepparents or a person they have gone on several dates with is arguable depending on a court’s interpretation of this definition.
What is an Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) in Minnesota?
A Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) is similar to an OFP in that it doesn’t need to come as a result of a criminal charge. However, the alleged victim and assailant don’t need to have any type of special relationship. To receive an HRO a person must have allegedly assaulted, stalked, disseminated sexual images of, repeatedly targeted unwanted words or acts at, or blocked the entrance of a property to prevent access to an alleged victim. The HRO can either be longstanding or temporary. The person filing the HRO must claim an immediate and present danger of future harassment. As noted above, an HRO can cover a wide range of conduct.
While in a normal criminal case a person must be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted of a crime. In an HRO proceeding, the court must only find that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent has engaged in harassment. This lowered standard of proof means that a person is especially vulnerable with having an HRO issued against them.
An HRO normally comes in the form of a no-contact order (meaning that a person is not allowed to contact or continue harassing another person). However, the specifics of this order can vary from case to case.
What is a Domestic Abuse No Contact Order (DANCO) in Minnesota?
A Domestic Abuse No Contact Order (DANCO) can be distinguished from an OFP or HRO in that it comes as the result of a criminal charge. A DANCO normally is ordered by the court in a criminal proceeding or juvenile court proceeding stemming from domestic abuse, harassment or stalking of a family or household member, or from a violation of an OFP.
A DANCO is normally put in place until the criminal case is resolved or as a condition of probation after sentencing, although in certain circumstances the DANCO can be removed prior to the resolution of the criminal case, normally only by both parties agreement to the DANCO being removed. However, it is important to wait until the court formally drops the DANCO before resuming contact.
The Consequences of an OFP, HRO or DANCO
If you are facing an OFP, an HRO, or a DANCO, the consequences can be severe. Unlike a criminal case, the burden of proof for an OFP, HRO, or DANCO is low. These tools are sometimes leveraged against a person to gain custody rights or child support. They can also be used for retaliation. These consequences can also be long-term. An OFP can be granted for as long as 50 years and can affect your right to purchase or own a firearm.
Violating an OFP, HRO or DANCO
Violating an OFP, HRO or DANCO is a crime and the violation will appear on your criminal record. The consequences of violating one of these orders can be severe.
If a police officer has reason to believe the order has been violated, the violator is likely to be arrested.
Because these orders apply to both parties, not just the party that the OFP, HRO or DANCO was taken out against, if the original alleged victim violates the order, they can be held responsible for the violation as well. This type of violation often occurs when an OFP or DANCO is taken out while the alleged victim is angry and the alleged victim later forgives the alleged perpetrator of the abuse and seeks out or agrees to contact with the alleged abuser.
What form does an OFP, HRO or DANCO take?
Normally, face-to-face contact is entirely prohibited by an OFP, HRO or DANCO. A person can be prohibited from coming within a certain distance of an alleged victim’s home, work, school and sometimes even their family’s homes or other places the alleged victim frequents. Additionally, while passing messages through others is not direct contact, this kind of contact is normally also prohibited by these orders.
Courts will often grant exceptions for certain types of communication like communicating about parenting arrangements, necessary communications related to an impending divorce or communications required to engage in mediation. Courts will sometimes mandate that this excepted communication take place in a traceable and electronic form – like through text messages or emails.
Doesn’t the U.S. Constitution protect my right to to a fair trial regardless when a court decides whether a OFP, HRO or DANCO should be granted?
The Minnesota Supreme Court considered this exact question in State v. Ness in 2013. Ness’s attorney argued that Ness’s due process rights were violated by a DANCO issued against him after he was arrested for assaulting his wife. The court found that Ness’s due process rights were not violated by issuing a DANCO. The court reasoned that although a normal court trial was not held to determine guilt or innocence the way there would have been if Ness was facing a criminal charge, the pre-trial release hearing or sentencing hearing that proceeds a DANCO provides the person facing the DANCO the right to be heard regarding the DANCO and therefore satisfies the due process requirement.
Ness also argued that the statute regulating DANCOs was impermissibly vague and encouraged arbitrary enforcement. Ness argued that the standard for the court deciding whether there was abuse was too low and contrasted the standard for granting a DANCO which simply is that the defendant is charged with a crime against the alleged victim with OFPs and HROs where there must be probable cause that abuse took place for the relevant order to be granted. However, the court was not sympathetic to this argument either, reasoning that because the pre-trial release hearing or sentencing hearing provides the courts a chance to decide whether there is probable cause to believe the defendant actually committed one of the relevant offenses the due process requirement is satisfied.
Contacting a St. Paul Criminal Lawyer To Defend Your Rights
It is important to understand the implications of an OFP, HRO or a DANCO being granted against you. The granting of these orders can be fought in court. Whether you are in the early stages of facing one of these orders or you are being prosecuted for the violation of one, it is important to contact a criminal defense lawyer to discuss your options. Reach out to experienced St. Paul criminal defense attorney John Lesch today for the best chance of a positive resolution.