Use it or lose it

This article originally appeared in the Fall 2025 issue of Thinking Minnesota magazine.

Hennepin County officials fail to use new law enforcement tools to keep carjackers at bay

Criminal justice officials in Hennepin County are failing to use the new state statute and enhanced penalty specifically designed to help reduce violent carjackings. Given that 81 percent of all carjackings and 87 percent of all armed carjackings in the entire state occur in Hennepin County, that’s a problem.

A valuable new tool

In 2023, the Minnesota Legislature created statute 609.247 to focus on the specific act of carjacking rather than treating carjackings as a traditional robbery. This new law was enacted to address the dramatic increase in carjackings.

Additionally, the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission (MSGC) reviewed the new law and elected to respond to the scourge of carjackings by enhancing the severity level of the crime.

First-degree carjacking (armed with a dangerous weapon) was given a severity level of nine, making it a presumptive prison commitment crime punishable by an 86-month prison sentence for a first offense. Second-degree carjacking (dangerous weapon implied) was given a severity level of seven, making it a presumptive stayed sentence of 36 months for a first offense. Third-degree carjacking (under any other circumstance) was given a severity level of six, making it a presumptive stayed sentence of 21 months for a first offense.

These enhancements elevated the penalty for armed and unarmed carjacking one severity level above similar robberies. This was a significant victory for those valuing a consequential criminal justice system.

The new law and enhanced penalties offer county attorneys and the courts a significant tool to incapacitate violent offenders — an effort that would serve to enhance the other rationales for punishment: deterrence, rehabilitation, and retribution.

For that to occur, however, justice officials need to make use of the new statute and enhanced penalty, not avoid them. Unfortunately, the Hennepin County Attorney and the Hennepin County District Court have failed to utilize the statute or impose an enhanced penalty as intended, and this failure has only exacerbated the public safety concerns in Hennepin County.

An explosion of carjackings in the early 2020s

Around the turn of this decade, Minnesota began seeing a dramatic rise in carjackings, primarily in the metro area. Unfortunately, given that carjackings were charged as a subset of robbery, the tracking of these crimes across the state didn’t occur with any uniformity. This made it difficult to quantify the problem with any accuracy.

In 2020, local reporting estimated that carjackings in Minneapolis had increased from 104 in 2019 to 401 in 2020. In 2021, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety reported that Minneapolis had recorded 655 carjackings, and the entire state had recorded 779, a record high in both Minneapolis and the state.

Anecdotal stories of violent carjackings as reported in the local media helped provide context for the overwhelming data. A family in Minnetonka was unloading groceries while parked in their driveway when they were carjacked and assaulted. The vice chair of the Democratic Party in Minneapolis was violently carjacked outside her North Minneapolis home. An elderly woman was violently carjacked in an Edina grocery store parking lot in broad daylight. The boldness and violence seemed to be growing as the frequency of carjackings increased.

While the Minnesota Legislature was slow to respond, it eventually passed a new carjacking statute during the 2023 session designed to address carjackings. Additionally, the MSGC’s enhancement of the carjacking penalty gave teeth to the new law, giving hope to those who value a consequential criminal justice system. These efforts gave prosecutors and the courts powerful tools to combat carjacking — but they have to use them.

Reviewing the data

Center of the American Experiment analyzed data from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office (HCAO), the Hennepin County Court System, and the Minnesota Department of Corrections. The analysis focused on carjacking incidents, prosecutions, and sentences in Hennepin County during the entire first year that the new carjacking statute and enhanced penalties were in place.

The data is deeply troubling. It shows that virtually no one is being prosecuted, convicted, or sentenced in Hennepin County consistent with the new carjacking statute and enhanced penalties.

The results

The following is an analysis of the data covering the first full year Minnesota’s carjacking law was in effect, from Aug. 1, 2023, through July 31, 2024.

[Note: Incidents and cases are similar in that they refer to a single incident. Multiple offenses can be committed in the same incident or case, by either the same offender or a group of offenders acting in concert.]

BCA carjacking incident data (attempted and/or completed)

Total number of carjacking incidents in Minnesota: 429
- Total number in Hennepin County: 349 (81 percent of state total).
Carjackings involving a firearm in Minnesota: 265 (62 percent of all carjackings).
- Carjackings involving a firearm in Hennepin County: 231 (87 percent of all carjackings in the state involving a firearm).
Victims injured in carjackings in Minnesota: 152 (57 percent of all carjackings).
- Victims injured in carjackings in Hennepin County: 116 (73 percent of all carjacking injuries in the state).
Race of carjacking offenders in Minnesota: 77 percent black, 6 percent white, 17 percent other.
- Race of carjacking offenders in Hennepin County: 80 percent black, 4 percent white, 16 percent other.
Race of carjacking victims in Minnesota: 50 percent white, 30 percent black, 20 percent other.
- Race of carjacking victims in Hennepin County: 54 percent white, 29 percent black, 17 percent other.
- [Note: Statewide data on the use of the new carjacking statute by the 86 counties other than Hennepin was not yet available at the time of this publication. However, those 86 other counties account for just 19 percent of the carjackings outside of Hennepin County.]

Hennepin County Attorney carjacking case data

One hundred five carjacking incidents submitted by law enforcement for consideration for charges (30 percent of all Hennepin County carjacking incidents reported to the BCA).
Sixty-three carjacking incidents resulted in offenders being charged with some type of offense (60 percent of cases submitted).
- Of these 63 incidents: Seventeen were adult cases involving 114 potential criminal offenses, of which seven cases listed 16 identified carjacking offenses to be considered; forty-six were juvenile cases involving 299 potential criminal offenses, of which six cases listed 14 identified carjacking offenses to be considered.
Thirteen incidents of carjacking resulted in carjacking charges being issued, according to the HCAO. This equates to:
- Four percent of all carjacking incidents in Hennepin County.
- Twelve percent of carjacking incidents submitted by law enforcement in Hennepin County.
- Twenty percent of all carjacking incidents in which criminal charges were filed in Hennepin County.

Hennepin County District Court data

Juvenile cases

A significant number of juvenile cases were sealed, making any conclusive analysis of the outcomes of these cases impossible. However, a review of the available case records told the same worn-out story of an ineffective juvenile court system.

The following is an incomplete list of some of the more egregious outcomes of cases involving carjackings by juvenile offenders:

A guilty plea to aggravated robbery involving a firearm. The sentence was “continued without adjudication,” and the defendant was put on probation for two years.
A guilty plea to aggravated robbery involving a firearm. The sentence was adjudicated, and the defendant was put on probation until the age of 21.
Case dismissed despite the defendant’s fingerprints on the interior door handle of the carjacking victim’s car.
A defendant with 22 offenses listed was “adjudicated delinquent” of two counts of aggravated robbery, while two others involving a firearm were dismissed. He was sentenced to 3 1/2 years of supervised probation and “treatment.”
A defendant with 12 offenses listed involving a strong-armed carjacking was allowed to plead guilty to a single count of simple robbery, dismissing the other counts. He was sentenced to six months of supervised probation.
A defendant who displayed a handgun in the forceful carjacking of a victim was allowed to plead guilty to fleeing the police in the carjacked car and pled down to a misdemeanor. He was sentenced to 12 months of supervised probation.
A defendant, involved in the armed carjacking of an Uber driver where a gun was put to the driver’s head, was adjudicated delinquent for damage to property and fifth-degree misdemeanor assault. He was sentenced to 12 months of supervised probation.

Adult cases

Each of the 17 adult “carjacking” cases in which a criminal charge was filed were reviewed. The cases involved 14 defendants — two were juveniles prosecuted as adults, two had their cases dismissed because the U.S. Attorney stepped in to prosecute them, and two of the cases remain “pending.”

A review of the initial charges, amended charges, court dispositions, and sentences of these 14 defendants revealed the following:

The Hennepin County Attorney issued a total of eight counts of carjacking against just seven adult court defendants.
Six of the eight carjacking counts were later amended to robbery or something lesser at the time of a plea bargain or dismissed outright. One remains pending.
Just one third-degree carjacking count resulted in an actual conviction for carjacking. The judge, however, sentenced the defendant to 90 days in the Hennepin County Workhouse and declared that if the defendant successfully completed probation, the conviction would be reduced to a misdemeanor.
All other defendants were allowed to plead guilty to other offenses, such as robbery, assault, or auto theft, despite the fact that each case involved actual carjacking elements — many involving a firearm or other dangerous weapon.
One of those defendants was originally charged with attempted murder and first-degree carjacking for stabbing a man during a violent carjacking at a gas station. The defendant was allowed to plead guilty to assault while the carjacking charge was dismissed. According to Department of Corrections records, he will serve just 75 months in prison before his anticipated release.
Another defendant, a juvenile male convicted as an adult for his involvement in seven cases involving armed robberies over three years (from the details available, most of them appear to be armed carjackings) was allowed to plead guilty to seven armed robberies and had all carjacking and assault charges dismissed. The judges sentenced him to a total of 591 months in prison, but each of the sentences runs concurrently rather than consecutively. According to Department of Corrections records, he will serve approximately 61 months in prison for these seven carjacking-related armed robberies.
Another defendant, one involved in the violent carjacking of the family unloading groceries at their Minnetonka home, had an extraordinary case involving consideration of 50 criminal offenses, including first-degree carjacking, burglary, and auto theft. He was charged with a total of 14 counts, including first-degree carjacking, aggravated robbery, burglary, and auto theft. He was allowed to plead guilty to an amended complaint charging him with robbery, burglary, and auto theft, while dismissing the carjacking charge. According to the Department of Corrections, he will serve just 36 months in prison before his anticipated release.
Yet another defendant committed an armed carjacking of a female teacher as she arrived at school in Minneapolis. The defendant pointed a gun at her and told her, “Don’t move or I’m going to kill you.” He then forced the woman into the car and began driving off with her before she was able to jump out. The defendant was originally charged with first-degree carjacking but was later allowed to plead guilty to an amended charge of robbery and was sentenced to 57 months in prison. According to the Department of Corrections, he is expected to serve approximately 31 months in prison before his anticipated release date.

Takeaways

Our county attorneys and courts were given the tools to send a resolute mes- sage to violent offenders involved in carjackings. In the case of Hennepin County, which is sadly home to 81 percent of the state’s entire number of carjackings, 87 percent of the state’s armed carjackings, and 73 percent of the state’s carjackings resulting in injury, the county attorney and courts are failing to utilize these powerful tools.

Hennepin County utilized the new carjacking statute in just 4 percent of the carjacking incidents that occurred in the county during the first year the new law was in place. Just one adult defendant was ultimately convicted of carjacking — receiving a 90-day workhouse sentence and a guarantee to reduce his conviction to a misdemeanor upon successful completion of probation.

Social justice advocates will point to the fact that carjacking incidents have been falling in Minnesota since their high point in 2021 and argue that enhanced penalties were not needed. This belies the fact that a combination of enhanced law enforcement efforts and a widely publicized federal crackdown on carjacking in Minnesota were both implemented in 2022. Those enhanced law enforcement and prosecutorial efforts have undoubtedly reduced the number of carjacking incidents in Minnesota — certainly more than the social justice efforts led by a reluctance to use the state’s new carjacking statute have.

Efforts to further combat the scourge of carjackings in the metro area would only be enhanced by a commitment from Hennepin County justice officials to employ the new carjacking statute and enhanced penalties. The effort to incapacitate violent carjacking offenders would protect communities on the front end by preventing offenders from continuing their violent actions. Incapacitation would then offer our correctional entities a realistic opportunity to fulfill the other rationales for punishment — rehabilitation, deterrence, and retribution.