Recently, a sex sting operation in Bloomington, Minnesota, led to the arrest of at least 14 men, including former Minnesota Senator Justin Eichorn. The operation involved undercover officers posing as minors online, engaging with individuals who sought to solicit sexual conduct.
If you’ve been accused of online solicitation or enticement in Minnesota, the steps you take next can have lasting consequences. These cases are complex, and even a misunderstanding during a text exchange can lead to felony charges. Keller Law Offices in Minneapolis has represented clients in high-stakes internet sting operations and understands how prosecutors build these cases. Call 952-913-1421 to discuss your situation in a free consultation.
Table of Contents
Solicitation of Children to Engage in Sexual Conduct
Under Minnesota law, it is illegal for anyone aged 18-years-old or older to solicit a child to engage in sexual conduct. The state defines a child as anyone 15-years-old or younger. Prohibited under state law is any attempt to persuade, entice, or coerce a child into sexual activities, whether through direct communication or electronic means.
Definition of Solicitation Under Minnesota Law
Minnesota defines solicitation as “commanding, entreating, or attempting to persuade” a minor to engage in sexual conduct. Solicitation, as defined, doesn’t require physical contact or even an explicit agreement to meet. A person may be charged with solicitation if they initiate or continue communication that indicates a desire or attempt to engage in sexual activity with a minor. The law emphasizes intent and action, rather than requiring the conduct to be completed.
Courts in Minnesota interpret attempting to persuade broadly. For example, messages that are sexual in nature or imply a willingness to meet for sexual purposes may qualify, even if the conversation never results in an actual meeting. As such, the definition is rather expansive, and risky, for those who communicate with minors online.
Use of Electronic Communication in Solicitation Cases
One of the most critical aspects of Minnesota’s solicitation law is its focus on electronic communications. Under state law, solicitation includes interactions via the internet, social media platforms, email, text messages, chat apps, or any other digital method. This provision reflects the reality that many solicitation attempts today take place through technology.
Law enforcement agencies routinely conduct undercover sting operations online. Officers pose as minors on social platforms, dating apps, or messaging services. If an adult engages with what they believe is a minor and attempts to arrange a meeting or sends sexually explicit content, they may be arrested and charged, even if no actual child is involved.
The Bloomington sex sting in March 2025 provides a clear example. Officers from multiple jurisdictions, including Bloomington and Ramsey County, set up fake online profiles posing as underage girls. The suspects allegedly initiated sexually charged conversations and agreed to meet what they thought were minors for sex. According to law enforcement, those conversations occurred entirely through online messaging platforms.
Intent to Engage in Sexual Conduct
Intent is a key component of solicitation charges in Minnesota. The prosecution must prove that the defendant acted with the purpose of engaging in sexual conduct with a person 15 years of age or younger. It is not enough to show that inappropriate messages were exchanged. There must also be evidence that the communication was made with the goal of facilitating a sexual encounter.
This can involve overt suggestions of meeting up, requests for explicit images, or the sharing of graphic materials. In many cases, suspects are arrested when they show up at a predetermined location to meet the individual they believed to be a child. However, a meeting does not need to take place for a person to be charged. In fact, Minnesota courts have upheld convictions based solely on online conversations that clearly show sexual intent.
Age of the Minor and Age of the Accused
To qualify as criminal solicitation under Minnesota law, the alleged victim must be 15-years-old or younger. The law also applies if the individual solicited is actually a law enforcement officer or adult posing as a minor, as long as the defendant believed the person was underage.
The accused must be at least 18-years-old to be charged under this statute. The age threshold separates adolescent behavior from predatory conduct and reflects the law’s intent to target adults who seek out minors for sex.
Importantly, claiming that the accused believed the child was older is not a valid defense. Minnesota law applies a strict liability standard to the age element of the crime. If the individual thought they were communicating with a 15-year-old, they can be prosecuted, even if the minor was actually an undercover officer or their real age was different.
No Requirement for Physical Contact or Exchange
Another important provision of Minnesota’s solicitation statute is that there is no requirement for physical contact to occur. A person may be charged and convicted even if the communication never leads to a real-world meeting or sexual act. The attempt alone, paired with intent, is enough to trigger criminal liability.
The lack of requirement for physical contact or exchange is particularly relevant in cases involving online sting operations. In the Bloomington case, several suspects were arrested as soon as they arrived at the meeting location. Others were taken into custody after investigators reviewed chat logs that clearly indicated sexual intent.
Penalties
Violating this statute is a felony offense. Convicted individuals may face up to five years in prison, a fine of up to $10,000, or both. Additionally, a conviction may require mandatory registration as a sex offender, participation in treatment programs, and restrictions on internet use.
Communication of Sexually Explicit Materials to Children
Minnesota law prohibits the distribution of sexually explicit materials to minors. This includes any material, language, or communication that describes sexual conduct, distributed to a child or someone the individual reasonably believes is a child.
Scope of Prohibition Under Minnesota Law
Minnesota law criminalizes the transmission of sexually explicit materials to minors through any form of communication. The law covers not just in-person contact or physical media, but also emails, text messages, social media, and other online platforms. If an adult sends sexually graphic messages, photos, or videos to someone under the age of 16-years-old, or someone they believe is under 16-years-old, they may be charged with a criminal offense. Likewise, minors may face charges when kids share sexually explicit images with other kids.
The law is intentionally broad in its scope. Courts consider the nature of the content, the language used, and the context in which the communication took place. Even non-explicit images accompanied by suggestive language may be enough to warrant criminal charges. Sharing hyperlinks, memes, or digital content that depicts sexual conduct can also fall under this statute if the recipient is a minor.
Reasonable Belief That the Recipient Is a Minor
In many cases, the person receiving the communication may not actually be a child. However, if the sender reasonably believes they are, the law still applies. Reasonable belief is particularly important in law enforcement sting operations where officers pose as minors. The focus is on the defendant’s perception and intent, not the actual age of the person on the other end.
For example, if a defendant believes they are talking to a 14-year-old and sends them explicit messages, that belief alone is sufficient for charges, even if the “minor” is a 35-year-old undercover investigator. The courts have consistently ruled that the subjective belief of the accused, combined with explicit content or suggestive language, meets the threshold for prosecution.
This aspect of the law prevents defendants from using the “they weren’t really a child” defense, closing a common loophole in internet-based sex crimes.
Use of Undercover Law Enforcement in Online Operations
Minnesota courts allow the use of undercover officers and decoys in solicitation and enticement investigations. It is not entrapment for law enforcement to pose as a minor, initiate contact, or even respond positively to sexual advances during the course of an investigation. Entrapment only applies if an officer pressures or induces someone to commit a crime they would not have otherwise committed.
In the Bloomington sting, law enforcement agencies created online profiles of underage girls and waited for suspects to initiate contact. These operations were carefully structured to gather clear evidence of intent, such as requests for nude images or plans to meet. Many suspects were arrested after arriving at a prearranged location, believing they would be meeting a minor for sex.
Facing Solicitation Charges in Minneapolis? Keller Criminal Defense Attorneys Can Help
A solicitation or enticement charge in Minnesota carries serious consequences—felony conviction, prison time, and lifelong sex offender registration. These cases often move quickly, and prosecutors rely heavily on digital evidence that can be taken out of context.
If you’ve been accused of online solicitation or communicating with a minor inappropriately, you need a Minneapolis sex crime lawyer that understands how to challenge intent, expose flaws in undercover operations, and protect your rights.
Keller Law Offices, based in Minneapolis, has extensive experience handling sex crime defense in both state and federal court. Contact our law offices today at 952-913-1421 to schedule a free consultation and start building your defense.
