- Home
- Criminal Defense
- Arson & Negligent Fires
- Assault
- Burglary
- Child Neglect
- Criminal Vehicular Operation
- Disorderly Conduct
- Domestic Assault
- Drug Crimes
- Federal Crimes
- Gun Rights Restoration
- Malicious Punishment of a Child
- Murder/Homicide
- Obstructing Legal Process
- Pre-Charge Representation
- Probation Violations
- Robbery
- Sex Crimes
- Sexual Assault
- Theft
- Threats of Violence
- Traffic Ticket Attorney
- Underage Drinking Crimes
- Weapons Charges
- White Collar Crimes
- Dwi Lawyers
- 1st Degree DWI Minnesota
- 2nd Degree DWI Minnesota
- 3rd Degree DWI Minnesota
- 4th Degree DWI Minnesota
- Implied Consent Law
- License Consequences
- License Plate Impoundment
- Limited License
- Bail & Conditional Release
- Mandatory Penalties
- DWI Defenses
- Minnesota DWI Laws
- Field Sobriety Tests
- Vehicle Forfeiture
- Ignition Interlock Device
- DWI Case Results
- Expungement Law
- Case Results
- Assault Case Results
- Domestic Assault Case Results
- Drug Crime Case Results
- DWI Case Results
- Expungement Case Results
- Felonies
- Gross Misdemeanor
- Misdemeanor
- Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
- Sex Crimes
- Theft & Shoplifting Case Results
- Threats of Violence Case Results
- Traffic Violations Case Results
- About
- Blog
- Contact Us
Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
To see just how successful our approach is, here are some representative results:
State v. R.K.W.
June, 2024
Charges: 2nd Degree DWI - Gross Misdemeanor (2 counts); Obstruction of Legal Process & a separate Driving After Cancellation - Inimical to Public Safety (GM)
Resolution:
Plea to a single DWI count, dismiss remaining two counts of the DWI case (including the obstruction of legal process charge) AND dismiss the entire separate case for driving after cancellation - inimical to public safety. Not only that, but the sentence did not include a term of in-custody time, which is mandated by law. This is truly a phenomenal result and one that can only be achieved through the creative and aggressive negotiation skills from the North Star team.
Types of Charge(s): DWI Case Results, Gross Misdemeanor, Obstructing Legal Process Case Results, Traffic Violations Case Results
State v. R.W.
November, 2023
Charges: 3rd Degree Drug Possession by a School/Park - Felonies; Felony fleeing of a motor vehicle; obstructing legal process as a gross misdemeanor
Resolution:
Stay of adjudication to both the drug charge and fleeing in a motor vehicle. The end result - upon the successful completion of probation - is a complete dismissal of the entire case. This is a remarkable outcome due to the nature of the allegations, the fact the officers were not a fan of the client due to the alleged obstruction, and this was achieved in a notoriously challenging County against drug-related offenses. Despite these obstacles, Mr. Gempeler worked hard on the prosecutor to get this needed outcome that avoids both any felony convictions and the possible lengthy loss of license that comes from a felony fleeing conviction. Given that there were no defenses to these charges, obtaining this outcome was tough sledding, but one that the North Star team routinely achieves for its clients.
State v. B.S.
November, 2023
Charges: 4th Degree Assault Against Cops; Obstructing Legal Process - Gross Misdemeanors
Resolution:
Stay of adjudication. The client had retained other defense counsel, but switched to North Star after her former attorney demonstrated a lack of will and fight. Once North Star took over, we worked hard to humanize our client, explain the major consequences that could come from a conviction, and fought tooth and nail to get a new offer on the table that would permit us to argue for a stay of adjudication to the Court. The State did not agree and, in fact, argued for a stay of execution at sentencing. Despite this, Mr. Gempeler successfully convinced the Court to grant the stay of adjudication - over state objection, which rarely happens (and technically shouldn't by law) - and give the client the second chance she so deserves.
State v. J.B.
February, 2023
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Misdemeanor
Resolution:
Continuance for dismissal. Client was facing a bogus charge because he ran his mouth in a very inebriated state of mind. Cop was sensitive and charged him with obstructing legal process. The North Star team brought an aggressive approach, including filing a motion to dismiss for a lack of probable cause. On the date of the hearing, the prosecutor finally offered the only reasonable plea deal that the client should consider. And while we wanted to fight it, the guaranteed outcome for only 6-months was too good to pass up and allowed the client to put this in the past and move forward with his clean record intact.
State v. M.K.
June, 2020
Charges: Obstructing Legal Process - Gross Misdemeanor;
Fleeing on Foot, Underage Consumption, Fake ID, and Public Urination - Misdemeanors
Resolution:
Stay of Adjudication to the Fleeing on Foot charge and a petty misdemeanor conviction for the underage consumption charge. The remaining charges were dismissed. With a stay of adjudication, the client is never convicted of the offense, so long as he abides by manageable terms of probation for one-year. And after he does this, he will walk away from this case without a single criminal conviction on his record since the petty misdemeanor conviction is not a crime under Minnesota law. For a college student who was doing well and has a bright future, avoiding a long-lasting criminal conviction record was necessary. Thankfully, he heeded North Star's advice to take proactive steps that convinced the prosecutor that he was a good kid, who just made some poor decisions one night. Another fantastic result for our client.
Types of Charge(s): Gross Misdemeanor, Minor Consumption, Misdemeanor, Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
State v. C.W.
February, 2020
Charges: Obstruction of Legal Process and Reckless Driving - both misdemeanors
Resolution:
Plea to an amended count of speeding as a petty misdemeanor. The client was wrongfully charged with obstructing legal process and reckless driving. The obstruction charge is a very serious offense, but it was based simply on the officer believing my client was lying to him. Even if true, lying to an officer during the course of an investigation is not a crime. On top of that, the record was completely void of true evidence to support the reckless driving charge. Once retained, the North Star team set out on a course of aggressive litigation against both charges. Realizing the case was weak, the State offered the only type of charge that the facts supported. The client accepted, knowing the value of the guaranteed result - a petty misdemeanor speeding ticket - which would not lead to any job consequences. He was thrilled with the result, to say the least.
State v. S.M.
June, 2018
Charges: Felony 4th Degree Assault (of an Officer) and Gross Misdemeanor Obstruction of Legal Process
Resolution:
Stay of adjudication to the assault charge. Offenses involving harming an officer and disobeying their commands are often difficult to resolve in a favorable manner. Almost always, the prosecutor will want a permanent conviction. Yet, Mr. Gempeler was able to get a stay of adjudication, which means the client will not have a conviction following her successful completion of probation. Another terrific result - and this was in a county in which Mr. Gempeler had yet to practice in, proving that our approach works across the State.
Types of Charge(s): Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
State v. M.D.
January, 2018
Charges: 3 separate cases out of two counties. In one county, the client had two cases: one misdemeanor obstruction of legal process and one misdemeanor public intoxication. In the other county, the client picked up a misdemeanor disorderly conduct and fleeing on foot.
Resolution:
Stays of adjudication on the obstruction of legal process and disorderly conduct charges, and then a petty misdemeanor sentence for the public intoxication. Because of this incredible result, the client's future is saved. He is a National Guard member and would have been barred from being deployed later this year and possibly discharged from the service if he was convicted of these offenses. The primary county initially was steadfast in claiming it needed a plea to the obstruction charge because the client already had a stay of adjudication in the other county. Yet, with the right approach by Mr. Gempeler and some proactive measures taken by the client, the State agreed to give the client a second chance and earn the right to keep his future intact. It's a tremendous result and shows just how committed the team at North Star is in looking big picture and fighting for your future.
Types of Charge(s): Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
State v. W.K.
April, 2017
Charges: Obstruct Legal Process, 5th Degree Assault (2 Counts), and Disorderly Conduct
Resolution:
Case was dismissed. Mr. Gempeler utilized a big picture approach with a like-minded and thoughtful prosecutor to prove that the client was simply not the person that committed the alleged offense. Instead, the client was at a low point, caused by mental health issues. Over the course of a year since the date of the incident, the client took significant and meaningful strides to improve his mental health and gain stability in his life, thus demonstrating that he was not a public safety concern. The prosecutor recognized this and agreed that a dismissal was appropriate and deserved. This is the type of personalized legal strategy that North Star offers its clients - an understanding of who they are, what happened, and how to get them back on their feet, which benefits them personally, but also leads to these type of terrific results.
Types of Charge(s): Obstructing Legal Process Case Results
State v. A.I.
December, 2016
Charges: Obstructing legal process, License Plate Fraud
Resolution:
Continuance for Dismissal. This matter was resolved by a continuance for dismissal, that in early negotiations was termed "impossible" to achieve. Hard work by Mr. Adkins, and careful avoidance of additional silly decision-making by a wise and creative client, meant the impossible became par for the course. This matter also exemplifies the importance of a client participating meaningfully in the process; his videotape evidence was essential in moving a prosecutor from leery to sympathetic.
Types of Charge(s): Obstructing Legal Process Case Results