What Is Relationship Evidence in Minnesota Criminal Cases?

If you or someone you know is facing criminal charges related to domestic violence or harassment in Minnesota, you may hear the term “relationship evidence” come up. Understanding what it means—and how it can impact a case—is crucial to preparing a strong legal defense.

Relationship evidence refers to information about past behavior between the defendant and the alleged victim—or even between the defendant and other family or household members. This type of evidence is most often used in cases involving:

• Domestic assault
• Stalking
• Harassment
• Violations of Orders for Protection (“OFPs”)
• Violations of Harassment Restraining Orders (“HROs”)

The State may be able to use this against a defendant in court under Minnesota Statute § 634.20.

Minnesota Statutes § 634.20 – Evidence of Conduct

Evidence of domestic conduct by the accused against the victim of domestic conduct, or against other family or household members, is admissible unless the probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issue, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. “Domestic conduct” includes, but is not limited to, evidence of domestic abuse, violation of an order for protection under section 518B.01; violation of a harassment restraining order under section 609.748; violation of a domestic abuse no contact order under section 629.75; or violation of section 609.749 or 609.79, subdivision 1. “Domestic abuse” and “family or household members” have the meanings given under section 518B.01, subdivision 2.

In plain terms, this statute allows prosecutors to present evidence of prior incidents between the accused and the alleged victim—or even others in the household—to help establish a pattern of behavior. The conduct doesn’t have to be charged or result in a conviction to be admitted as evidence.

Why Is Relationship Evidence Used?

The permissible goal of presenting relationship evidence is to provide context about the relationship’s history. Prosecutors use it to suggest that the incident in question wasn’t a one-time event but part of a broader pattern of behavior. Examples may include:

• Past threats or acts of violence
• Controlling or coercive behavior
• Prior violations of restraining orders
• Previous reports of harassment

This can be damaging to a defendant if the jury perceives the accused as having a violent or abusive history—even if there was never a conviction.

Defense attorneys often criticize the Relationship Evidence rule arguing that the real goal of the rule is to get a conviction for a defendant simply because they can be characterized as a “bad person” who has done bad things in the past. On the whole, criminal cases are supposed to be tried on the merits of the evidence – not typically on public perceptions of the defendant’s character or popularity. Critics state that the Relationship Evidence Rule is a way for prosecutors to make end-runs around the ban on character evidence in order to get in evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible.

Examples of Relationship Evidence

Let’s take a look at two examples.

For our first example, let’s say there are two people: (1) Defendant (“D”); and (2) the Alleged Victim (“AV”). D is currently charged with domestic assault against AV. D previously received a conviction for domestic assault against AV in 2021. The State will likely try to move for admission of that 2021 domestic assault conviction into evidence to show context about the relationship between D and AV.

A defense attorney would then move to exclude this evidence, likely on the basis that the conviction would be overly prejudicial and that the conviction’s admission into evidence would bring with it the potential to confuse the issues at trial and mislead the jury. It would then be up to the Court to decide whether to admit or exclude D’s previous conviction for domestic assault.

In our second example, let’s say there are three people: (1) Defendant (“D”); (2) Alleged Victim 1 (“AV1”); and Alleged Victim 2 (“AV2”). In 2021, D was formerly in a relationship with AV1 and was charged with domestic assault. D was ultimately convicted of disorderly conduct. Then in 2024, D was in a relationship with AV2 and was again charged with domestic assault. Just before trial on the case with AV2, the State files a motion stating its intent to enter in evidence regarding D’s conviction for disorderly conduct against AV1.

Again, in this situation, a defense attorney would move to exclude the evidence of the disorderly conduct conviction. Given that the conviction (1) was not for a domestic assault; and (2) was against a different alleged victim, a defense attorney would state that the conviction is too remote to provide context to the relationship between D and AV2. Furthermore, a defense attorney would again argue that entry of the disorderly conduct conviction would be overly prejudicial and that the conviction’s admission into evidence would bring with it the potential to confuse the issues at trial and mislead the jury.

How North Star Law Group Can Help

While Relationship Evidence can be persuasive to a jury, it is also controversial because of how prejudicial and damaging it can be to a defendant’s case. Skilled defense lawyers like those found at North Star Law Group may be able to limit or exclude this kind of evidence entirely. Even if this evidence is admitted, our attorneys may be able to counter this damaging evidence through effective cross-examination of the State’s witnesses.

If you’re charged with a domestic-related offense and the prosecution is seeking to use relationship evidence, your defense strategy must account for it. At North Star Law Group, we understand how to file the right motions, argue in evidentiary hearings, and protect your rights at trial.

Don’t let past allegations define your future. Let us help you take control of your defense. Contact North Star Law Group to get started.