Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 169. TRAFFIC REGULATIONS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 169.94 (2026)

Record Of Conviction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Not admissible as evidence.

No record of the conviction of any person for any violation of this chapter shall be admissible as evidence in any court in any civil action.

Subd. 2.Not to affect credibility as witness.

The conviction of a person upon a charge of violating any provision of this chapter or other traffic rule less than a felony shall not affect or impair the credibility of such person as a witness in any civil or criminal proceeding.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1943–1990 · leading case: Warren v. Marsh, 11 N.W.2d 528 (Minn. 1943).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Warren v. Marsh, 11 N.W.2d 528 (Minn. 1943). · cites it 4× “1941, § 169.94, subds. 1 and 2 (Mason St. 1940 Supp.”
Anderson v. Blair, 358 N.W.2d 708 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 169.94, subd. 1 (1982) provides that a traffic violation is not admissible as evidence in any civil action.”
May v. Strecker, 453 N.W.2d 549 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “’s argues that the trial court’s reliance on Minn.Stat. § 169.94, subd. 1 (1988) to exclude evidence of Strecker’s two prior DWI convictions was an abuse of discretion.”
Anderson v. Amundson, 354 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “Our holding is not in conflict with Minn.Stat. § 169.94, subd. 1 (1982) which provides that a record of conviction is not admissible as evidence in civil actions, since it is the defendant requesting its admittance and therefore no prejudice results.”
LeClair v. Sickler, 146 N.W.2d 853 (Minn. 1966). · cites it 6× “They contend that this procedure is in violation of § 169.94, which provides: “Subdivision 1.”
State v. Oden, 385 N.W.2d 420 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “In addition, Minn.Stat. § 169.94, subd. 2 (1984), prevents use of a traffic conviction less than a felony to impeach credibility.”
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.