DWI test refusal in Minnesota, explained in plain terms
One of the most common questions we get about a stop is whether you can refuse the test, and whether refusing is itself a crime. For DWI test refusal in Minnesota, the honest answer is: sometimes, and the difference comes down to what kind of test the officer asked for. We wrote this to explain that distinction the way we would in a first meeting, because it is widely misunderstood, and how a test request is handled at the roadside can turn a DWI into a second, separate charge.
The short version: refusing a lawful breath test is a crime in Minnesota, charged at minimum as third-degree DWI, a gross misdemeanor. A blood or urine test is different, because those generally require a search warrant. And a refusal has two separate consequences: a criminal charge and a civil driver’s license revocation, which run on their own tracks.
Here is how it actually works.
Is refusing a test a crime in Minnesota?
Under Minnesota Statute 169A.20, subdivision 2, refusing to submit to a required chemical test is a crime. A test-refusal charge is filed at minimum as third-degree DWI, which is a gross misdemeanor carrying up to 364 days in jail and a $3,000 fine, plus the mandatory minimums that apply to gross-misdemeanor DWIs. With an aggravating factor present it can be charged as second-degree, and with three or more qualified prior incidents it can rise to first-degree felony DWI. In other words, refusing does not make the situation go away; it can create a charge that stands entirely on its own, separate from whether you were actually over the limit. The refusal crime is set out in Minnesota Statute 169A.20.
Before arrest, the roadside is different
One distinction matters more than any other, and a lot of people never hear it: what happens at the roadside is not the same as what happens after a lawful arrest. Before you are arrested, you have an absolute right to refuse to speak with the police, to decline the standardized field sobriety tests, and to refuse the preliminary breath test, the small handheld test an officer offers on the road. Refusing that preliminary breath test is not a crime.
The refusal crime applies to the chemical test that comes after a lawful arrest, once the implied-consent advisory has been read. That is the test the law can actually require, and it is the one a refusal charge is built on. Confusing the two is one of the most common mistakes we see.
There is one more piece of nuance the statute does not put on the surface: the consequences of a refusal are sometimes less severe than the consequences of a high test result, and sometimes they are not. Which way it cuts depends entirely on the facts, which is exactly why this is a decision worth a lawyer’s input rather than a guess made at the side of the road.
The part most people get wrong: breath versus blood
This is the distinction that matters, and a lot of what you will read online states it imprecisely. It comes from a 2016 United States Supreme Court decision, Birchfield v. North Dakota, and the Minnesota cases applying it.
A breath test can be required without a warrant, as a search that goes along with a lawful arrest. Because the breath test is lawful without a warrant, refusing it can be charged as a crime.
A blood or urine test is treated differently. Those generally require a search warrant, or a recognized exception to the warrant requirement. When the officer has a warrant for a blood or urine test, refusing that test is a crime. But a demand for a warrantless blood or urine test cannot, by itself, be the basis for a criminal refusal charge. That is a real and important line, and whether it applies depends entirely on the specific facts of a stop, which is exactly the kind of thing we look at closely.
What “implied consent” means
Minnesota, like every state, has an implied-consent law. Under Statute 169A.51, by driving in Minnesota you are treated as having already consented to a chemical test to check for impairment if you are lawfully arrested for DWI. Before the test, the officer reads an implied-consent advisory that tells you three things: that Minnesota law requires you to take the test, that refusing is a crime, and that you have the right to speak with an attorney before deciding, as long as doing so does not unreasonably delay the test. That short phone call with a lawyer is a right for a reason, and it is one of the few moments in the whole process where quick advice from us can genuinely change what happens next, which is why we take those calls seriously. The advisory itself becomes part of the record, and whether it was read correctly can matter a great deal later in the case.
Two consequences, two separate tracks
This is the other thing people miss. A refusal sets off two different processes at once, and they are not the same case.
The first is the criminal test-refusal charge described above, which goes through the criminal court. The second is a civil driver’s license revocation, handled administratively by the commissioner of public safety. The civil license loss has its own deadlines and its own challenge process, and it can take effect even if the criminal case later resolves in your favor. People routinely focus only on the criminal charge and miss the civil deadline, which is one of the first things we check, because that deadline does not wait for the criminal case. We cover this in more depth on our Minnesota DWI test refusal page.
What has to be true for a refusal charge to hold up
A refusal charge is not automatic just because someone said no. For the charge to stand, several things generally have to line up, and each is something we check. The arrest itself has to be lawful, because the whole implied-consent process flows from a valid DWI arrest. The test that was demanded has to be one the law actually allowed the officer to require without your consent, which brings the breath-versus-blood distinction back into play. If a warrant was needed, it has to have been a valid one. And the implied-consent advisory has to have been read properly, including telling you about the right to consult a lawyer. When one of those pieces is missing, the refusal charge can be a lot weaker than it first looks.
The civil side: challenging the license revocation
Because the license revocation is a separate civil matter, it has its own short window to challenge it, and that window does not pause while the criminal case plays out. If you want to contest the revocation, there is a limited time to file for review, and missing it usually means the revocation simply stands. This is the deadline we look for first when someone calls after a refusal, because it can pass quietly while all of your attention is on the criminal charge. The exact time limit and the reinstatement path depend on the current rules, so it is worth confirming right away rather than assuming.
How these cases are actually worked
Every refusal case is different, and we will never promise you an outcome. What we can tell you is where they turn. Because a refusal charge depends entirely on the test being lawfully required, the details of how the request was made carry real weight, and small facts about the stop can change the whole picture. We would rather tell you honestly where your case is exposed than sell you a promise we cannot keep, and the first step for us is always a careful read of what was demanded, what was said, and whether the law actually required you to comply.
What to do if you already refused
If you have already refused, a few things help us the most. Write down everything you remember about the stop while it is fresh: what the officer said, which test was asked for, whether a warrant was mentioned, and whether you were told about your right to a lawyer. Do not assume the license revocation is a lost cause, because the deadline to challenge it may still be open, and we would rather look at it than let it pass by default. And bring us the paperwork you were given, because the notice of revocation and the advisory itself often tell us a great deal about whether the refusal charge holds up. The sooner we see all of it, the more room we usually have to act.
Frequently asked questions
Is refusing a breathalyzer a crime in Minnesota?
Yes. A breath test can be required without a warrant as part of a lawful arrest, so refusing it is charged as a crime, at minimum third-degree DWI, a gross misdemeanor. Refusing does not avoid a DWI; it can add a separate charge.
Can you refuse a blood test in a Minnesota DWI?
A blood or urine test generally requires a search warrant. If the officer has a warrant, refusing that test is a crime. A demand for a warrantless blood or urine test, on its own, cannot be the basis for a criminal refusal charge. Whether that applies depends on the specific facts, so it is worth having a lawyer review exactly what happened.
What is the penalty for test refusal in Minnesota?
A test-refusal charge is at minimum third-degree DWI, a gross misdemeanor carrying up to 364 days in jail and a $3,000 fine, plus mandatory minimums. It can be charged higher with aggravating factors or prior incidents. On top of the criminal charge, a refusal triggers a separate civil license revocation.
Does refusing a test mean you lose your license in Minnesota?
A refusal triggers a civil license revocation through the commissioner of public safety, which is separate from the criminal case and has its own deadline to challenge it. The exact revocation period and any ignition-interlock requirements depend on your history and the current rules, so those are worth confirming for your specific situation.
Facing a test refusal charge in Minnesota?
When we take a refusal case, we look at two things right away: whether the test was lawfully required in the way the refusal charge assumes, and whether the civil license deadline is about to run, because that clock moves independently of the criminal court. Getting both right early is often what keeps a refusal from doing more damage than it has to. You can read more about how we handle these on our Minnesota DWI test refusal page, more about DWI generally on our DWI defense page, or see the full range of charges we handle in our criminal defense practice. If you have been charged, reach out and we will walk you through where you stand.