Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 169A. DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 169A.26 (2026)

Third-Degree Driving While Impaired

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

Subdivision 1.Degree described.

(a) A person who violates section 169A.20, subdivision 1 (driving while impaired crime), is guilty of third-degree driving while impaired if one aggravating factor was present when the violation was committed.

(b) A person who violates section 169A.20, subdivision 2 (refusal to submit to chemical test crime), is guilty of third-degree driving while impaired.

Subd. 2.Criminal penalty.

Third-degree driving while impaired is a gross misdemeanor. The mandatory penalties described in section 169A.275 and the long-term monitoring described in section 169A.277 may be applicable.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case: State v. Netland, 762 N.W.2d 202 (Minn. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Netland, 762 N.W.2d 202 (Minn. 2009). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 169A.26, subd. 1(a) (2008) ("A person who violates section 169A.”
Rita Ann Stevens v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 850 N.W.2d 717 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “9, § 5, at 1446 (codified at Minn. Stat. § 169A.26 (Supp. 2003)). 7 Stevens contends that Minnesota’s implied-consent statute violates the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine because it imposes on a driver a choice between, on the one hand, relinquishing the Fourth Amendment…”
Magnuson v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 703 N.W.2d 557 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “And under both the 2002 and 2003 versions of section 169A.26, the presence of an aggravating factor at the time of a driving-while-impaired violation makes the violation a third-degree offense, which is a gross misdemeanor.”
State v. Lemmer, 736 N.W.2d 650 (Minn. 2007). · cites it 4× “1(1), (5) (2006), and Minn.Stat. § 169A.26 (2006). Lemmer had an implied consent hearing on August 1, 2005, to challenge the license revocation.”
State v. Melde, 725 N.W.2d 99 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 4× “1(1) (2004), and Minn.Stat. § 169A.26 (2004). The district court granted Melde’s motion to dismiss the gross-misdemeanor test-refusal charge, concluding that “by failing to advise arrestees of the enhanced criminality and penalties that result from refusal,” the implied consent…”
State v. Rosenbush, 931 N.W.2d 91 (Minn. 2019). · cites it 6× “See Minn. Stat. § 169A.26 (2018) (making refusal *99 to submit to a chemical test a gross misdemeanor if no aggravating factors are present); Minn.”
State v. Crane, 766 N.W.2d 68 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “In this case, Crane was convicted of third-degree DWI in violation of Minn. Stat. § 169A.26, subd. 1 (2006). Under subdivision 1, a person is guilty of third-degree DWI upon proof of a violation of Minn.”
State v. Myers, 711 N.W.2d 113 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “2 (2004), and Minn.Stat. § 169A.26 (2004), and fourth-degree DWI in violation of Minn.”
State v. Hunn, 911 N.W.2d 816 (Minn. 2018). · cites it 2× “1(b) (2016) ; Minn. Stat. § 169A.26, subd. 1(b) (2016) ; Minn.”
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson, 887 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. §§ 169A.26, subd. 1(b), 609.03(2) (2014).”
Patino v. One 2007 Chevrolet, VIN 1GNFC16017J255427, Texas License Plate 578VYH, 821 N.W.2d 810 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 2× “1(1), under the conditions described in Minn.Stat. § 169A.26, subd. 1(a) (2010); fourth-degree DWI (under the influence of alcohol) in violation of Minn.”
State v. Ferguson, 786 N.W.2d 640 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 169A.26, subd. 2 (2007). The sentencing guidelines provide that one criminal-history point is to be assigned if the offender was on probation following a conviction of gross-misdemeanor driving while impaired.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
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.