Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 631.21 (2026)

Dismissal Of Action

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

The court may order a criminal action, whether prosecuted upon indictment or complaint, to be dismissed. The court may order dismissal of an action either on its own motion or upon motion of the prosecuting attorney and in furtherance of justice. If the court dismisses an action, the reasons for the dismissal must be set forth in the order and entered upon the minutes. The recommendations of the prosecuting officer in reference to dismissal, with reasons for dismissal, must be stated in writing and filed as a public record with the official files of the case.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: State v. Krotzer, 548 N.W.2d 252 (Minn. 1996).
State v. Krotzer, 548 N.W.2d 252 (Minn. 1996). · cites it 40× “See Minn.Stat. § 631.21 (1994). The court of appeals also rejected the State's separation of powers argument, stating that the "prosecution can recommend a sentence, but it cannot force the court to impose a sentence from a list the prosecution wants.”
State v. Streiff, 673 N.W.2d 831 (Minn. 2004). · cites it 24× “Dismissal under Minn.Stat. § 631.21 Streiff argues that because the court had the power to dismiss the charges on its own motion under Minn.”
State v. Hart, 723 N.W.2d 254 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 28× “However, an order is not appealable * * * if it is an order dismissing a complaint [in the furtherance of justice] pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 631.21 * * *.” 4 Minn. R.Crim.”
State v. Thoma, 569 N.W.2d 205 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “The prosecution, however, may appeal in any case, from any pretrial order of the trial court except an order dismissing a complaint for lack of probable cause to believe the defendant has committed an offense or an order dismissing a complaint pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 631.21 * *…”
State v. Sahr, 812 N.W.2d 83 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 23× “*86 The following day, defense counsel moved the court to dismiss the complaint sua sponte in the furtherance of justice pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 631.21 (2010). 3 On the same day, the State again moved for inclusion of a lesser-included offense of second-degree criminal sexual…”
State v. Ramirez, 597 N.W.2d 575 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 14× “However, an order is not appealable * * * if it is an order dismissing a complaint pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 631.21 * * *. Minn.Stat. § 631.”
State v. Aarsvold, 376 N.W.2d 518 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 6× “in any felony or gross misdemeanor case, as of right, from any pretrial order of the district court, * * * except an order dismissing a complaint for lack of probable cause to believe the defendant has committed an offense or an order dismissing a complaint pursuant to Minn.”
State v. Gault, 551 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 18× “The state also appeals from the district court’s dismissal of the complaints in the interests of justice under Minn.Stat. § 631.21. FACTS This case arises from an incident that allegedly occurred at the Hennepin County Detention Center.”
State v. Prabhudail, 602 N.W.2d 413 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 8× “" Minn. Stat. § 631.21 (1998). I can point out that dismissals in the furtherance of justice are not appealable.”
State, City of Crystal v. Kivi, 554 N.W.2d 97 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 12× “The state may appeal as of right to this court in any case, from any pretrial order of the trial court except an order dismissing a complaint for lack of probable cause to believe the defendant has committed an offense or an order dismissing a complaint pursuant to Minn.Stat. §…”
State v. Barrett, 694 N.W.2d 783 (Minn. 2005). · cites it 2× “A pretrial order is not appealable if it is based solely on a factual determination that a complaint lacks probable cause or if it is an order dismissing a complaint in the interests of justice under Minn.Stat. § 631.21 (2004). Minn. R.Crim.”
Wynn v. State, 879 A.2d 1097 (Md. 2005). · cites it 2× “); Minn.Stat. § 631.21 (2003, 2005 Cum.Supp.”
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.