State v. Serbus, A19-1921

• Decision Date: 31 March 2021
• Docket Number: A19-1921
• Citation: 957 N.W.2d 84
• Parties: STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Kevin Russel SERBUS, Appellant.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

957 N.W.2d 84

STATE of Minnesota, Respondent,

v.Kevin Russel SERBUS, Appellant.

A19-1921

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Filed: March 31, 2021

Keith Ellison, Attorney General, Saint Paul, Minnesota; David Torgelson, Renville County Attorney, Olivia, Minnesota; and Scott A. Hersey, Special Assistant County Attorney, Saint Paul, Minnesota, for respondent.

Drake D. Metzger, Metzger Law Firm, LLC, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for appellant.

OPINION

ANDERSON, Justice.

Minnesota Statutes section 624.7142, subdivision 1(4) (2020), prohibits a person who is under the influence of alcohol from carrying a pistol in a public place. Here we are asked to determine whether a driver of a motor vehicle is in a public place for the purpose of that statute when the vehicle is on a public highway. The district court determined that the interior of a private motor vehicle is not a public place when it is not regularly held open to the public and, accordingly, dismissed the count charging appellant Kevin Serbus with a violation of Minn. Stat. § 624.7142, subd. 1(4). The court of appeals reversed, concluding that the proper subject of analysis is the highway on which Serbus was driving, and reinstated the charge. Because we conclude that the Legislature intended to prohibit an impaired person from carrying a pistol on public streets even when that person is inside a motor vehicle, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals.

FACTS

The facts are not in dispute. On July 26, 2019, a deputy Renville County sheriff stopped Serbus after watching the vehicle Serbus was driving swerve across the center lane of the highway. The deputy conducted a field sobriety test after noting the smell of alcohol coming from the vehicle and that Serbus had bloodshot and watery eyes. A preliminary breath test showed that Serbus had an alcohol concentration of .09. The deputy arrested Serbus and placed him in the back of the squad car.

The deputy asked Serbus whether there were any items that Serbus wanted from his vehicle. Serbus replied that he wanted his keys, wallet, and phone. Serbus notified the deputy that his phone was in the center console next to his firearm, a Ruger .45 caliber pistol. The deputy retrieved the items for Serbus and transported him to the Renville County Jail. At the time of the stop, Serbus had a valid permit to possess a pistol. There is no evidence in the record that Serbus possessed the pistol anywhere outside of his vehicle.

Serbus was charged with four crimes, including Count 4, carrying a pistol in a public place while under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 624.7142, subd. 1(4). Serbus moved to dismiss the charges. After holding a contested omnibus hearing, the district court dismissed Count 4 for lack of probable cause. The district court relied on the definition of "public place" in Minn. Stat. § 624.7181 (2020), a statute under which Serbus was not charged. That statute prohibits the carrying of rifles and shotguns in a "public place," which it defines as including "private property that is regularly and frequently open to or made available for use by the public." Id. , subd. 1(c). The court observed that "a private motor vehicle is not a public place" and that there was no indication that Serbus "frequently makes his vehicle available for use by the public." Therefore, the court concluded, there was no probable cause that Serbus carried the pistol in a public place while under the influence of alcohol.

On the State's pretrial appeal, the court of appeals reversed. State v. Serbus , 947 N.W.2d 690 (Minn. App. 2020). The court of appeals looked to its holding in State v. Gradishar , 765 N.W.2d 901 (Minn. App. 2009), in which it had defined public place for the purpose of Minn. Stat. § 624.7142 —the section under which Serbus is charged—as follows: " ‘[G]enerally an indoor or outdoor area, whether privately or publicly owned, to which the public have access by right or by invitation, expressed or implied, whether by payment of money or not.’ " Serbus , 947 N.W.2d at 692 (quoting Gradishar , 765 N.W.2d at 903 ). Applying that definition here, the court concluded that the meaning of public place was nonetheless ambiguous because the relevant subject could be either the interior of Serbus's car or the highway on which he drove. Id. Employing several canons of construction, the court determined that the "proper subject of analysis is the public highway on which Serbus drove his vehicle," which it further concluded was a public place. Id. Accordingly, the court of appeals reversed the dismissal of Count 4 and remanded to the district court. Id. at 693.

Serbus filed a petition for review, which we granted.

ANALYSIS

In this pretrial appeal, we are asked to decide whether a person driving a vehicle on a public highway is in a "public place" for the purpose of Minn. Stat. § 624.7142, subd. 1. "When the State appeals a pretrial order, it must show clearly and unequivocally (1) that the district court's ruling was erroneous and (2) that the ruling will have a ‘critical impact’ on the State's ability to prosecute the case." State v. Underdahl , 767 N.W.2d 677, 683 (Minn. 2009) ; see Minn. R. Crim. P. 28.04, subd. 2(2). Because the district court dismissed the charge, critical impact is met. See Underdahl , 767 N.W.2d at 684 (stating that dismissal of a charge has a critical impact on the prosecution's case even if other charges remain). Thus, we need consider only whether the district court's interpretation of the statute was erroneous.

The interpretation of a statute is a question of law, which we review de novo. Larson v. State , 790 N.W.2d 700, 703 (Minn. 2010). The object of all statutory interpretation is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the Legislature. Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2020). "If the Legislature's intent is clear from the statute's plain and unambiguous language, then we interpret the statute according to its plain meaning without resorting to the canons of statutory construction." State v. Struzyk , 869 N.W.2d 280, 284–85 (Minn. 2015) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

But if "a statute is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation, then the statute is ambiguous" and we may consider the canons of statutory construction. State v. Hayes , 826 N.W.2d 799, 804 (Minn. 2013).

A.

We first determine whether the meaning of public place is ambiguous. The statute provides: "A person may not carry a pistol on or about the person's clothes or person in a public place ... (4) when the person is under the influence of alcohol." Minn. Stat. § 624.7142, subd. 1. The statute does not define "public place." Neither does the relevant definitions section in the same chapter. See Minn. Stat. § 624.712 (2020) (providing definitions for Minn. Stat. §§ 624.711 –.717 (2020)). Because the statute does not define public place, we may "look to dictionary definitions of those words and apply them in the context of the statute" to determine whether public place has a plain and unambiguous meaning. State v. Haywood , 886 N.W.2d 485, 488 (Minn. 2016).

Dictionaries offer a variety of definitions for both "public" and "place." One meaning of public is "accessible to or shared by all members of the community." Webster's Third New International Dictionary Unabridged 1836 (2002). Another meaning is "supported by or for the benefit of the people as a whole." Id. Still another is "exposed to general view: conspicuous, open." Id. In the context of the statute, which regulates where an intoxicated person may carry a pistol, all of these meanings are reasonable. See Haywood , 886 N.W.2d at 488 (stating that we consider dictionary definitions in light of the context of the statute when determining whether there is a plain meaning of a word).

Similarly, there are a variety of definitions of place, even after excluding meanings not related to location, such as those involving sequence, rank, or employment. Place can mean "[a]n area with definite or indefinite boundaries; a portion of space." The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1345 (5th ed. 2011); cf. Webster's Third New International Dictionary Unabridged 1727 (defining place as "a physical environment: space"). It can also mean "[a] building or an area set aside for a specified purpose." The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1345; cf. Webster's Third New International Dictionary Unabridged 1727 (defining place as "a building or locality used for a special purpose"). Still other meanings include a "dwelling"; a "business establishment or office"; a "locality, such as a town or city"; or a "public square or street with houses in a town." The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1345. Thus, as relevant here, place can be used in either a geographical sense, such as one's presence on a highway, or in a spatial sense, such as one's presence inside a car, bus, or other vehicle.

Taken together, "public place" could reasonably mean a geographical or spatial location that is accessible to, supported by or for the benefit of, or visible to, people as a whole. Because there is more than one reasonable meaning of "public place," we conclude that the statute is ambiguous. See Hayes , 826 N.W.2d at 804 (stating that a statute is ambiguous when it "is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation"). Consequently, we cannot determine from the face of the statute whether the driver of a motor vehicle on a highway is in a public place.

Although Serbus admits that the statute is ambiguous, he asserts that the interior of his car is unambiguously not a public place under the definition formulated by the court of appeals in Gradishar , 765 N.W.2d at 903. There, the court defined public place for the purpose of section 624.7142 as "generally an indoor or outdoor area, whether privately or publicly owned, to which the public have access by right or by invitation, expressed or implied, whether by payment of money or not." Id. Of...