Minnesota Police Bodycam Laws: Private Data by Default

Minnesota is an outlier among states with a dedicated bodycam statute: under Minn. Stat. section 13.825, police body camera footage is classified as private, not public, data by default. Most footage stays out of public reach unless it falls into a specific statutory exception, such as an officer's use of deadly force, which must be kept and made available indefinitely.

This guide is part of our Police Bodycam Laws by State series. It explains why Minnesota footage starts out private, when it becomes public, and how a 2022 Minneapolis shooting tested that framework in real time.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses Minnesota law governing police-worn body cameras under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, principally Minn. Stat. sections 13.825, 13.82, and 626.8473. It does not address whether a civilian may record an on-duty officer, which is a separate question covered in our guide on recording someone without consent.

Minnesota's Default Rule: Bodycam Footage Is Private, Not Public

Minnesota takes a different starting position than most states with a dedicated bodycam statute. Under Minn. Stat. section 13.825, subdivision 2, body-worn camera data is classified as private data on individuals when it identifies a specific person, or nonpublic data when it does not, rather than presumptively public. In practical terms, that means a member of the public generally cannot walk in and demand a copy of ordinary bodycam footage the way they could demand many other Minnesota government records, or the way residents of states like Colorado or Nevada can demand bodycam footage under those states' public-records-first frameworks.

The statute carves out specific, narrow categories that flip to public automatically. Footage is public if it documents an officer discharging a firearm in the course of duty in a way that requires notice under Minn. Stat. section 626.553, subdivision 2, or a use of force that results in substantial bodily harm. Footage is also public if the person who is the subject of the recording requests its release, or if it qualifies as public personnel data under Minn. Stat. section 13.43. Outside those categories, the recording stays private, accessible mainly to the person depicted and to law enforcement personnel who have a legitimate, work-related reason to view it. Certain aggregate and administrative information about an agency's bodycam program, such as how many cameras it owns, how much footage it holds, and its written policy, is separately made public regardless of the content classification.

How Long Must Minnesota Agencies Keep Bodycam Footage?

Retention scales with the seriousness of what the footage shows. Under Minn. Stat. section 13.825, subdivision 3, ordinary footage must be kept for a minimum of 90 days before an agency may destroy it under its records retention schedule. Footage documenting an officer's discharge of a firearm in the course of duty, or a use of force causing substantial bodily harm, must be retained for at least 1 year. The subject of a recording can also request that an agency preserve a copy for up to 180 days for evidentiary purposes.

The strictest rule applies to the most serious incidents: footage documenting an officer's use of deadly force must be retained indefinitely. Minnesota does not allow that category of recording to age out or be routinely deleted, regardless of how the underlying case resolves.

Does Minnesota Require Police to Wear Body Cameras?

No. Minnesota has no statute compelling every law enforcement agency to deploy body cameras. Minn. Stat. section 626.8473 instead regulates agencies that decide to use a "portable recording system," Minnesota's statutory term for body and squad-car cameras. Before purchasing or deploying one, an agency must allow for public comment and adopt a written policy addressing use, data classification, and retention, and must post that policy on its website. Agencies that use portable recording systems must also undergo an independent biennial audit to confirm that data is classified correctly, used appropriately, and destroyed on schedule.

Because adoption is a local decision layered on top of a data-privacy statute rather than a mandate, coverage across Minnesota is uneven. Large departments such as the Minneapolis Police Department and St. Paul Police Department have well-developed bodycam programs with published policies, while smaller and rural agencies have adopted the technology at their own pace and expense.

How Does Footage Ever Become Public Before the Statutory Trigger?

Minnesota law gives agencies a discretionary escape valve even when a recording would otherwise stay private. Minn. Stat. section 13.82 classifies certain data as "public benefit data," data an agency may choose to release, even from an active investigative file, when doing so will help the law enforcement process, promote public safety, or dispel rumor and unrest. This provision does not compel disclosure. It authorizes it, which means two similar incidents can be treated very differently depending on how a given department's leadership decides to exercise its discretion, a tension Minnesota press-freedom advocates have flagged as a weak point in an otherwise unusual privacy-first framework.

The February 2, 2022, killing of Amir Locke by a Minneapolis SWAT officer during a no-knock warrant is the clearest real-world illustration. Locke, who was not the subject of the warrant, was shot roughly 10 seconds after officers entered the apartment where he was sleeping on a couch. Ordinarily, footage of an active-investigation shooting would remain private data under section 13.825 while the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension's investigation was open. Instead, facing public pressure from community members, city council members, and state lawmakers, Minneapolis released an edited bodycam clip roughly 36 hours after the shooting, relying on the public benefit data provision rather than waiting for the recording to qualify as public under one of section 13.825's automatic triggers, since the incident involved deadly force rather than a mere firearm discharge with no resulting harm. Minnesota's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension released additional footage in the following weeks as its investigation progressed.

Recording Police Versus Police Recording You

This guide covers the reverse of most recording-law content on this site: what happens to footage police create of you, not whether you may record police. Minnesota is a one-party consent state for recording conversations, and that rule governs civilians recording each other, not an agency's decision to classify its own bodycam data as private under the Data Practices Act. For the separate question of whether it's legal to record someone, including an officer performing public duties, see our guide on whether it's illegal to record someone without their consent.

Frequently asked questions