State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Decker

Summary

The court affirmed Decker’s convictions for fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct and indecent exposure, holding that simultaneous electronic communications with a minor satisfy the statutory requirement that the conduct occur in the minor’s presence. Because the statutory terms were ambiguous, the court applied legislative-purpose canons and concluded that excluding online communications would undermine the statutes’ protection of minors. The court also held that exhibiting or exposing a photographic image of genitals falls within the ordinary meanings of the relevant statutory verbs. Justice Anderson, joined by Chief Justice Gildea, dissented, concluding that physical presence was required and that the convictions should be reversed.