Appeals court denies former Interchange owner’s request for relief

Published 6:01 am Tuesday, February 14, 2023

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has denied post-conviction relief for the former owner of The Interchange Wine & Coffee Bistro in Albert Lea convicted of operating her restaurant in violation of emergency executive orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Lisa Hanson argued she was entitled to relief because the district court violated her due-process rights, but the Appeals Court found the rights were not violated. 

Hanson opened her restaurant for in-person dining in violation of state executive orders on six occasions during December 2020 and January 2021, and in December 2021 a six-member jury found her guilty of six misdemeanor counts of violating an emergency executive order. She was Hanson sentenced to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. A separate set of charges was dismissed in November 2022. 

Email newsletter signup

Hanson in February 2022 petitioned for post-conviction relief, after which the court corrected the sentence and removed the $1,000 fine as state statute allows either the 90 days in jail or the fine, not both. The court otherwise denied her petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. 

Hanson, who represented herself for the entirety of the proceedings, argued the executive orders exceeded the governor’s statutory authority and that because the peacetime emergency had ended and the executive orders terminated, the state should have halted prosecution. She also questioned the jurisdiction in the case and the jury instructions, which she said violated her right to a jury trial. 

The Appeals Court found the pandemic was a valid basis for declaring a peacetime emergency and that the governor had authority to prohibit on-premises consumption of food and beverages. 

It also upheld the district court’s instruction to the jury that the executive orders had “the full force and effect of law” and found the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hanson’s petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.