Case Results

State v. J.A.P., June, 2015

Charges: Fourth Degree DUI

Resolution: Stay of Imposition to an amended count of careless driving and the DUI charges were dismissed. The blood test revealed an alcohol concentration level of 0.15. Despite the client being nearly twice the legal limit, Mr. Gempeler was undeterred in seeking and obtaining a Careless Driving – which is usually reserved for 0.10 or lower. Mr. Gempeler was skillful and diligent in negotiating with a talented prosecutor. The icing on the cake was that the client was not required to complete a significant amount of community service or jail time to earn this outcome. The negotiated sentence required no jail, no community service, a minimal fine, and probation to the court.

State v. T.B., 

Charges: Second Degree Burglary

Resolution: All counts dismissed after investigation and interviews by our staff. Client was facing consecutive prison terms if the matter was not dismissed; great example of lawyers and clerks undaunted by State’s accusations, pressing for details notwithstanding a damning complaint and initial reports.

State v. C.S., 

Charges: Felony Assault count against a Sheriff’s Deputy

Resolution: Misdemeanor sentence to an assault charge, successfully obtained upon arguments directly to Trial Judge – even after the State refused to relent from a prison-commit offer. No jail was required. Client’s outstanding effort to rehabilitate himself changed hearts and minds, and legal arguments regarding voluntary intoxication convinced the judge to extend a probationary outcome to the client. A significant win, to say the least.

State v. J.O., 

Charges: Felony Fraud/Forgery/Theft counts

Resolution: Dismissal with prejudice of all counts. The win was the result of a combination of efforts, including Mr. Adkins’ research, expert-consultation, and successful courtroom arguments. Client may now continue his burgeoning music career without fear of this damaging mark on his character.

State v. (Confidential), 

Charges: Felony Damage to Property Pre-Charge Matter

Resolution: After extensive research and interviews by North Star Criminal Defense staff, charges noll prossed (declined to be charged) by police and complainant. Client was a college senior who got to complete his education without a nasty charge with turpitude aspects. Another example of soft-glove negotiations fronting iron-fist litigation capacity, all to a favorable result. Client is overjoyed.

State of Minnesota v. Len Olson, CX-98-2048, 

Charges: Criminal Sexual Conduct in the First Degree, other related counts.

Resolution: In this matter, a client facing a mandatory 144 months in prison on allegations he had molested a minor child at a warming house received quite literally a new lease on life when the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the trial judge’s order that he be tried a second time. After initially electing to proceed to trial with a personal friend who specialized in bankruptcy, and being denied the opportunity to change counsel late in the proceedings by a judge on a crazy streak, Mr. Olson was forced to start a formal jury trial while representing himself. Dan achieved a landmark outcome, one that has been employed repeatedly since by other attorneys seeking to protect clients from abusive judges and prosecutors. In light of the judge’s manifest and repeated errors, and the refusal on the part of the prosecutor to halt the madness, Mr. Olson was absolved of the counts, and justice was finally achieved. This matter points up the importance of getting the right lawyer, right away. Do not hesitate, and do not stand pat with a lawyer who won’t answer your questions, or who does not make your own peace of mind the primary concern of your defense.

State of Minnesota v. Anthony Chevre, C5-99-1707, 

Charges: Felon in Possession of Firearm counts.

Resolution: In this matter, a client facing a mandatory 60 months in prison relating to a handgun found in his home, while officers were executing a search warrant for narcotics and other contraband had his conviction overturned, and the matter was remanded and eventually dismissed without another hearing. Mr. Chèvre, with convictions from Texas for heroin possession, had confessed to owning the gun that was found in his bedroom, but that statement was thrown out by the Court of Appeals due to the lack of a Miranda warning—this, notwithstanding the defendant was in his own home, and typically courts would have found such a conversation to be non-custodial in nature. This served as a seminal decision on Miranda grounds, and relieved the client of a massive prison commitment.

State of Minnesota v. Mark Staats, 658 N.W.2d 207 (Minn. 2003), 

Charges: Murder in the First Degree

Resolution: Another Miranda win for Dan, although this time with limited implications on the conviction, and the resultant mandatory sentence. This matter has been cited multiple times by courts around the country on the premise of reinitiated interrogations of a target in a murder investigation. Mr. Staats, initially approached as a potential witness in an horrific execution-style murder by another man, Mark Dahlin, gave two relatively innocuous statements to police, but after being arrested and taken to the Minnetonka Police Department for further questioning, he realized the importance of having a lawyer present. The balance of his comments to police—comprising five additional conversations and several hours of recordings, were later deemed by the Minnesota Supreme Court to have been erroneously admitted. Unfortunately, the combination of a state-favoring judge and an utterly horrible set of facts (the decedent wandered around in bare feet soaking up his own blood, dying only moments later…), resulted in a bit of a Pyrrhic victory—the sentence was upheld, at least initially, and the rejection of the statements provides only cold comfort. This case represents the absolute truth, one of the most inarguable statements a person can ever make: NEVER NEVER NEVER TALK TO POLICE, regardless of the circumstances. NEVER. Had Mr. Staats been cautious enough to demand legal counsel immediately upon being approached by investigators, he would be free today, utterly without responsibility for another man’s homicidal rage, and much the wiser for his close call. STAY SILENT, and call Dan or James STAT.

State of Minnesota v. Todd Longsdorf, K3-00-414, 

Charges: Narcotics Sale in the First Degree

Resolution: Police armed with a proper search warrant who turn a trailer almost completely inside out could not justify a further search of Dan’s client, including tearing his jacket apart, when they mishandled the manner of the search; a trial court finding that the search was excessive and insupportable was affirmed on appeal, and the client avoided a potential 100-month+ prison commitment. Yet another example of a case aggressively argued from bail hearing through early appearances and in a contested evidentiary hearing including a jury trial (if necessary) and most importantly artfully argued before the Court of Appeals. This represents one of Dan’s favorite cases to date, where the wins just kept coming, due in large part to a client dedicated to the best outcomes and to cautious, thoughtful conduct during the litigation process. Sobriety, law-abiding conduct, and timely assistance to your legal team mean the world, and helped immeasurably to make this outcome possible. Be the result you seek, is a great epigram for this case.

© 2019 Aggressive and Respected Criminal Defense Attorneys All Rights Reserved.

Web Site Design Powered by Rocket Matter IMS.