Good Faith and Advice of Counsel as a Minnesota Defense

Good Faith Negates Specific Intent

Some crimes — many fraud, theft-by-deception, tax, and regulatory offenses — require proof that the defendant acted with a specific wrongful intent, such as an intent to defraud or to willfully violate a known duty. A genuine good-faith belief that the conduct was lawful or truthful is inconsistent with that intent. If the State cannot disprove your good faith, it cannot prove the crime.

What this means for you: Good faith is strongest against crimes built on intent to deceive or defraud. It is much weaker — often irrelevant — for general-intent or strict-liability offenses where wrongful purpose is not an element.

Advice of Counsel

Reliance on the advice of a lawyer can be evidence of good faith. The classic requirements are that you:

• Sought advice in good faith on the legality of the proposed conduct;
• Made full and honest disclosure of all the relevant facts to the attorney;
• Received advice that the conduct was lawful; and
• Actually relied on that advice in good faith.

If you hid facts from the lawyer, shopped for a favorable opinion, or didn't actually rely on the advice, the defense collapses.

What this means for you: Advice of counsel is not a shield you can manufacture after the fact. It depends on honest, complete disclosure and genuine reliance — and those facts get scrutinized closely.

Good Motive Is Different From Good Faith

A "good motive" — believing your ultimate goal was worthy — generally is not a defense. If you intentionally committed the elements of a crime, the fact that you meant well usually doesn't excuse it. Good faith works because it negates a required intent; good motive does not, because motive is typically not an element.

Where It Applies — and Doesn't

Good faith and advice of counsel are most relevant to specific-intent offenses. They are generally unavailable for:

• Strict-liability crimes (no intent element);
• General-intent crimes where wrongful purpose isn't required;
• Situations where the advice or belief concerned something other than the conduct's legality.

Relationship to Mistake of Law

This area overlaps with mistake of law. Ordinarily, not knowing the law is no defense — but for crimes that require willful or knowing violation of a legal duty, a good-faith misunderstanding (sometimes grounded in advice of counsel or an official statement) can negate that specific element. The distinction is technical and charge-specific.