Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

United States of America v. Evan James Oppegard

Date: 10-27-2025

Case Number: 25-cr-00072

Judge: Leo I. Brisbois

Court: United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (Hennepin County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Minneapolis

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Minneapolis Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory







Description:
Minneapolis, Minnesota, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with interstate threats to injury.



18 U.S.C. § 875(c) is a federal law that makes it a crime to transmit a communication containing a threat to kidnap or injure another person in interstate or foreign commerce



. To be convicted, the government must prove the defendant knowingly transmitted the communication with the intent to make a threat or with knowledge it would be viewed as a threat. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to 20 years.



What constitutes a violation?



Interstate or foreign communication: The communication must cross state or national borders.

Threat to kidnap or injure: The communication must contain a threat to kidnap or injure a person.

Intent: The sender must have intended to issue a threat or knew that the communication would be viewed as a threat.



Elements the government must prove



The defendant knowingly transmitted a communication.

The communication contained a threat to kidnap or injure someone.

The communication was transmitted for the purpose of issuing a threat, or with knowledge that it would be viewed as a threat.



The communication was transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce.



Related laws



18 U.S.C. § 875(a-b) and (d): These sections cover other types of threats, such as threats to injure property or reputation with the intent to extort, and demands for ransom.

18 U.S.C. § 876: This law specifically addresses sending threatening communications through the mail.



Examples of protected versus unprotected speech



Unprotected: If a person makes a statement that a reasonable person would interpret as a serious expression of intent to cause bodily harm, and the statement is transmitted across state lines, it could be a violation of this law.



Protected: The law does not apply to statements that are not serious expressions of intent to cause injury, such as political commentary or joking.

Outcome:
Custody of the BOP for 24 months; 18 months to be served consecutive and 6 months to be served concurrent to the term of imprisonment imposed in 20-CR-9 (JRT); No term of Supervised Release; $100.00 Special Assessment.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of United States of America v. Evan James Oppegard?

The outcome was: Custody of the BOP for 24 months; 18 months to be served consecutive and 6 months to be served concurrent to the term of imprisonment imposed in 20-CR-9 (JRT); No term of Supervised Release; $100.00 Special Assessment.

Which court heard United States of America v. Evan James Oppegard?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (Hennepin County), MN. The presiding judge was Leo I. Brisbois.

Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Evan James Oppegard?

Plaintiff's attorney: United States District Attorney’s Office in Minneapolis. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Minneapolis Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory.

When was United States of America v. Evan James Oppegard decided?

This case was decided on October 27, 2025.