Minnesota Supreme Court reverses woman's indecent exposure conviction

Yahoo

02-05-2025

May 1—ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Supreme Court overturned the indecent exposure conviction of a woman who exposed her breasts in a Rochester gas station parking lot in 2021.
The court's unanimous opinion, filed on Wednesday, April 30, determined that the state did not provide evidence to prove that Eloisa Rubi Plancarte "lewdly" exposed her body parts. Plancarte, of New Prague, was convicted in Olmsted County District Court of a misdemeanor charge of indecent exposure in December 2022.
"Criminalizing the exposure of female — but not male — breasts does not provide Minnesotans with adequate notice as to the conduct the indecent exposure statute prohibits because a binary approach to breasts fails to recognize the more nuanced physical realities of human bodies, whether they are intersex, transgender, nonbinary, or breast cancer survivors," Associate Justice Sarah Hennesy wrote.
"Would a transgender man be prohibited from exposing his chest?" Hennesy continued. "What about a transgender woman who has had top surgery? Where do the chests of intersex and nonbinary persons fit within this dichotomy? And how do we treat the exposed chest of a breast cancer survivor who has had a mastectomy?"
The case stems from an incident on July 28, 2021 when a Rochester police officer responded to a call of a woman walking around a gas station parking lot with her breasts exposed, court documents said. Officers arrived and observed Plancarte walking around without her shirt on. When an officer asked Plancarte why she kept exposing herself, Plancarte told him she was a stripper.
Plancarte was charged and convicted in Olmsted County with willfully and lewdly exposing her private parts in a public place.
Plancarte argued the conviction violated her right to equal protection under the law when she appealed her case in 2023, which resulted in a divided opinion, according to court documents.
The Minnesota Supreme Court was petitioned to review three issues: whether female breasts are "private parts," whether evidence proved Plancarte "lewdly" exposed her breasts, and whether the statute violates the federal and state guarantees of equal protection.
In Hennesy's concurrence, she wrote that the state failed to prove that Plancarte "lewdly" exposed her breasts. Hennesy also determined that because breasts are not reproductive organs nor excretory organs," they are not "private parts."
"Female breasts, on the other hand, are sexualized by societal stereotypes, and there is a great risk — an unacceptable risk, in my view — that any determination of whether their exposure constitutes 'conduct of a sexual nature' will be based on oversimplified beliefs or assumptions based on gender," the justice wrote.
However, Hennesy wrote, local government entities can craft policies to limit the public exposure of breasts as long as the policies align with the constitution's due process and equal protection principles.
Justice Karl Procaccini concurred with Hennesy. Justice Theodora Karin Gaïtas took no part in the opinion.