Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 169.122 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Repealed, 2000 c 478 art 2 s 8]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2025 · leading case: State v. Loge, 608 N.W.2d 152 (Minn. 2000).
State v. Loge, 608 N.W.2d 152 (Minn. 2000). “Appellant Steven Mark Loge was cited on September 2, 1997, for a violation of Minn.Stat. § 169.122, subd. 3 (1998), which makes it unlawful for the driver of a motor vehicle, when the owner is not present, "to keep or allow to be kept in a motor vehicle when such vehicle is upon…”
State v. Loge, 589 N.W.2d 491 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). “[*] Steven Mark Loge was convicted under Minn.Stat. § 169.122, subd. 3, of keeping an open bottle containing intoxicating liquor in an automobile.”
In Re Welfare of C.R.M., 611 N.W.2d 802 (Minn. 2000). “Finally, we recently held that Minn.Stat. § 169.122, subd. 3 (1998), which provides that "keep[ing]" an open bottle of alcohol in a vehicle on a highway is a misdemeanor, does not require the state to prove that the driver of a vehicle had knowledge of the existence of the open…”
Olson v. Ische, 343 N.W.2d 284 (Minn. 1984). “Finally, plaintiff-appellant Olsons raise on appeal, though they failed to do so below, the claim that the facts permit an inference of violation by defendant Fritz of the "open bottle" law, Minn.Stat. § 169.122 *290 (1982), which would be prima facie evidence of negligence, and…”
State v. Schinzing, 342 N.W.2d 105 (Minn. 1983). “Minn. Stat. § 169.122 , subd. 3 (1982). (f) This brings us to the discovery of the “stone” and the marijuana cigarette butt.”
State v. Combs, 394 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). “2231 (1984), an open bottle violation, Minn.Stat. § 169.122, subd. 2 (1984), obstructing legal process, Minn.”
State v. Pieschke, 295 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. 1980). “He was not being tried for a violation of the “open bottle” law, § 169.122. Therefore, the presence of the six-pack and the reference to the beer can could not possibly have prejudiced him, and it is clear the incidents were unintentional on the part of the prosecution.”
State v. Alesso, 328 N.W.2d 685 (Minn. 1982). “Given his experience, his observations, and the time and place of the observations, we believe that the officer was justified in believing that the liquid was liquor.”
State v. Combs, 398 N.W.2d 563 (Minn. 1987). “Under Minn.Stat. § 169.122 (1986) it is a misdemeanor for anyone, driver or passenger, to possess an open bottle containing intoxicating liquor or nonintoxicating malt liquor in any motor vehicle upon a public highway or for the owner or driver of such a vehicle to allow any…”
Holmquist v. Miller, 352 N.W.2d 47 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “In that case, the Court discussed the theory that a passenger *52 violated the "open bottle" law set forth in Minn.Stat. § 169.122 (1982). The Court merely said that the passenger's possession of an open bottle did not cause the injuries of the innocent third party and that no…”
State v. Pierce, 347 N.W.2d 829 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “Minn.Stat. § 169.122 (1982). See State v.”
In Re the Welfare of K.J.K., 357 N.W.2d 117 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). “In July 1982 he was adjudicated delinquent for a violation of the open bottle law, Minn.Stat. § 169.122 (1982), and ordered to complete a 40-hour work service program.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.