Appeals court tosses Lino Lakes inmate’s restraining order against corrections officer

The state’s appellate court has tossed a Lino Lakes inmate’s harassment restraining order against a corrections officer.

In an opinion released Monday, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the order was based “in parts on clearly erroneous factual findings and the findings that are supported by the evidence do not constitute harassment.”

Dane Michael VanderVoort was transferred to the Lino Lakes prison in April 2021 while serving his sentence for assault. In August 2021, he petitioned for a restraining order against corrections officer Anthony Pietrzak, saying Pietrzak started harassing him in June 2021.

In his petition, VanderVoort alleged Pietrzak “constantly watches” him and “uses foul language and demeaning remarks” toward him. He also claimed that Pietrzak stole his sunglasses and made threatening statements.

The district court granted VanderVoort’s request, saying it found that Pietrzak “made threats” toward VanderVoort and called him abusive names, which Pietrzak had denied.

The appellate court noted that harassment, by law, is a repeated act that has or is intended to have “a substantial adverse effect … on the safety, security, or privacy of another.”

It also noted several points where the evidence didn’t support the district court’s finding, including:

• Contradicting statements by VanderVoort regarding how often Pietrzak made comments to him,
• A statement by VanderVoort that admitted Pietrzak didn’t actually say, “I can do anything I want because I’m the union president” to him,
• Determining that saying, “I’m watching you,” doesn’t constitute a threat, given it is part of a corrections officer’s duties to watch inmates.

“VanderVoort’s testimony not only exposes these clearly erroneous factual findings, it also either fails to support or directly contradicts many of his initial allegations,” the Court of Appeals said in its opinion, adding, “We doubt that the district court’s findings would justify an HRO even if they were all supported by evidence, but we are certain that the supported findings cannot validate the order.”

However, the court did note the record supports six or seven instances where Pietrzak used the words, “f***ing idiot,” “stupid” and a slur related to homosexuality, and a few instances of inappropriate gestures. The appellate court said those findings clearly aren’t respectful or courteous and do support VanderVoort’s claims that he felt demeaned by the corrections officer’s actions. However, because they don’t have a substantial adverse effect on the inmate’s safety, security or privacy, they don’t rise to harassment.

“We of course do not condone the conduct alleged. Nor do we suggest that a correctional officer’s conduct in a prison setting can never constitute harassment warranting an HRO,” the appeals court said in its opinion. “We hold only that those factual findings that are supported by evidence in this case fall short of the statutory standard.”

Pietrzak was placed on administrative leave after the restraining order was filed, the Minnesota Department of Corrections told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS last August. The department said Pietrzak resigned from his position on Jan. 13 and no longer works for DOC.

Pietrzak told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS he resigned from his position around three months after he was cleared to return to work because he was continually put in areas by the department that would’ve violated the order. He also denied the allegations of derogatory conduct noted by the court.

VanderVoort is expected to be released from prison in March 2023.